The governor of state X in a speech to the Chamber of Commerce in stat

Question

The governor of state X in a speech to the Chamber of Commerce in state Y:

Many businesspeople in state Y who have never traveled to state X believe that we have inadequate airports. However, these people are mistaken. State X has spent more money per airport on improvements than has any other state in the country over the last five years. Because of this, our on-time flight percentage has risen 5 points in the last five years, and passenger complaints are down 10 percent over the same time period.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the reasoning in the governor's argument?

A) In the governor's state, spending on airport improvements has been growing more slowly over the last five years than in several other states, including state Y.

B) Businesspeople care more about the quality of hotels in the locations they visit than about the quality of the airports.

C) Over the last five years, many businesses have relocated out of state X, but a similar number have relocated into state X.

D) The business taxes in state X are higher than they are in state Y.

E) States spending the largest amount per airport on improvements are those with airports that typically cannot be made adequate.

Archit3110 · Answer

weaken conclusion State X has spent more money per airport on improvements than has any other state in the country over the last five year

COrrect option E ; States spending the largest amount per airport on improvements are those with airports that typically cannot be made adequate

ShreshthaGupta · Answer

Please post the correct answer for this question. I am confused among options B,D, and E.
However, if I were to mark one answer I would have marked E because B and D do indicate a reasoning why travelers from City Y do not visit City X. But do not directly hit on the point of inadequacy of the airports. It will be really helpful if you can provide a option wise reasoning for this question.
Thank You.

XyLan · Answer

Conclusion:  
 Since the airports of X has  Benefits  in on-time flight percentage & passenger complaints. -----------> The  Belief  of Y, regarding the airports of X of being  inadequate , is  NOT  right( mistaken ).

Reasoning of the Governor's argument:  
  Spending  more money on airports ------  led to  ------> The  Benefits  in on-time flight percentage & passenger complaints ------  leading to  ------> Adequacy
  - Because of this(  Spending  ), our on-time flight percentage has risen 5 points in the last five years, and passenger complaints are down 10 percent over the same time period.

Pre-thinking:  
 Assumption - The spending is responsible for the Benefits, resulting in the adequacy of the airports.

Q-Argument:  
  Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines  the reasoning  in the governor's argument? 
 Q-Meaning : We need to weaken the  reasoning  of the argument on which the conclusion is based.   - We need to target the Reasoning, NOT the Conclusion

Answer choice analysis:  
  Even though the spending is growing more slowly, the amount spent by X is HIGHER THAN that by any other state in the country over the last five years.
Let's say before 5 years - 
X spent: 1000 B$ | Other states: 500 B$
During these 5 years - 
X spent 1200 B$ - an increase of 20% | Other states: 900 B$: - an increase of 80% 
The above metrics does  NOT  provide a reason to doubt the reasoning. 
  We do  NOT  care about what Businesspeople care.   - It's irrelevant in refuting the reasoning.    
  Since the numbers are similar,  NO  impact on the reasoning.  - Neutral    
  This option is  NOT  addressing the reasoning of the argument.   - It's irrelevant in refuting the reasoning.   
    Aha !  It states that even though  huge spendings  are done by X in the airports, the airports are still  NOT  sufficient(  adequate  ).
Thus, Raising a  DOUBT  on the entire  LOGIC  chain of the argument.   - A Weakener

ShreshthaGupta · Answer

Thanks a lot Xylan. This is really helpful.

Posted from my mobile device

Nrj0601 · Answer

Kaplan Official Explanation

This is a Weaken question, as it asks for something that undermines reasoning. The correct choice will make it less likely that the conclusion follows from the stated evidence.

The governor's conclusion is that businesspeople who believe that state X's airports are inadequate are mistaken. In other words, state X's airports are not inadequate. She bases this conclusion on the fact that the state has spent more money per airport on improvements than has any other state in the last five years, as well as on statistics about improved airport quality.

The central assumption of this argument is that these pieces of evidence actually point to adequate airports in state X. The correct answer will point out some reason that this evidence does not support that conclusion.

(E) shows that the governor's evidence suggests the opposite of what she claims. The fact that state X spent more per airport on improvements than did any other state is not something to brag about, (E) says, because it indicates that the airports were so inadequate that they can't even be made adequate. Thus, (E) weakens the governor's reasoning and is correct.

(A) focuses on the rate of growth in spending on airport improvements. This doesn't change the governor's argument, which is only based on the fact that state X has spent more total money per airport than has any other state. (A) is therefore irrelevant to the argument.

(B) presents an irrelevant comparison. Whether businesspeople care more about hotels than airports has nothing to do with the question of whether the spending by state X demonstrates that the airports are now adequate.

(C) relates information about businesses relocating in and out of state X. This is completely immaterial to the question of whether the airports are adequate.

(D) is irrelevant to the argument as well. Business taxes don't indicate anything about the connection between the spending on airports and whether the airports are adequate right now.

TAKEAWAY: With Weaken questions, keep the focus on the connection between the stated evidence and the conclusion—the assumption. Don't forget that the task is to attack that connection. Keeping your focus here will make it easier to avoid wrong choices.

The governor of state X in a speech to the Chamber of Commerce in stat

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

The governor of state X in a speech to the Chamber of Commerce in stat

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards