The idea of building New Towns to absorb growth is frequently

Question

The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently considered a cure-all for urban problems. It is erroneously assumed that if new residents can be diverted from existing centers, the present urban situation at least will get no worse. It is further and equally erroneously assumed that since European New Towns have been financially and socially successful, we can expect the same sorts of results in the United States.

Present planning, thinking, and legislation will not produce the kinds of New Town that have been successful abroad. It will multiply suburbs or encourage developments in areas where land is cheap and construction profitable rather than where New Towns are genuinely needed.

Such ill-considered projects not only will fail to relieve pressures on existing cities but will, in fact, tend to weaken those cities further by drawing away high-income citizens and increasing the concentration of low-income groups that are unable to provide tax income. The remaining taxpayers, accordingly, will face increasing burdens, and industry and commerce will seek escape. Unfortunately, this mechanism is already at work in some metropolitan areas.

The promoters of New Towns so far in the United States have been  developers, builders, and financial institutions.  The main interest of these promoters is economic gain. Furthermore, federal regulations designed to promote the New Town idea do not consider social needs as the European New Town plans do. In fact, our regulations specify virtually all the ingredients of the typical suburban community, with a bit of political rhetoric thrown in.

A workable American New Town formula should be established as firmly here as the national formula was in Britain. All possible social and governmental innovations as well as financial factors should be thoroughly considered and accommodated in this policy. Its objectives should be clearly stated, and both incentives and penalties should be provided to ensure that the objectives are pursued. If such a policy is developed, then the New Town approach can play an important role in alleviating America’s urban problems.   1 
 1. The passage contains information that answers which of the following questions?

(A) Where did the idea of New Towns originate?
(B) How does Britain’s New Town formula differ from that of other European countries?
(C) What is the purpose of building New Towns?
(D) What incentives and penalties will be necessary to make a New Town formula workable?
(E) Why have European New Towns been financially successful?

2 
 2. The author believes that New Towns are not being built where they are genuinely needed because

(A) the government offers developers incentives to build in other areas
(B) the promoters of New Town are motivated chiefly by self-interest
(C) few people want to live in areas where land is still cheap
(D) no studies have been done to determine the best locations
(E) federal regulations make construction in those areas less profitable

3 
 3. According to the author, ill-considered New Towns will tend to weaken existing cities in which of the following ways?

I. They will cause an erosion in the tax base of existing cities.
II. The will divert residents from existing cities to other areas.
III. They will increase the number of low-income residents in existing cities.

(A) I only
(B) II only
(C) I and II only
(D) II and III only
(E) I, II, and III

4 
 4. According to the passage, as compared with American New Towns, European New Towns have been designed with greater concern for

(A) social needs
(B) financial factors
(C) urban congestion
(D) the profits of developers and builders
(E) the environment

5 
 5. The author’s tone in discussing “developers, builders, and financial institutions” ( Highlighted ) can best be described as

(A) critical
(B) pedantic
(C) evasive
(D) captious
(E) vitriolic

6 
 6. It can be inferred from the passage that the author believes which of the following about suburbs?

(A) They are a panacea for urban problems.
(B) They will soon be plagued by the same problems that now plague cities.
(C) They are poor models for New Towns.
(D) They drive up property values in inner cities.
(E) They alleviate some, but not all, of America’s urban problems.

7 
 7. It can be inferred from the passage that the author considers the present American New Town formula to be

(A) thoroughly considered
(B) insufficiently innovative
(C) potentially workable
(D) overly restrictive
(E) financially sound

8 
 8. The author of the passage is primarily concerned with

(A) arguing for a change in policy
(B) exploring the implications of novel idea
(C) comparing and contrasting two manifestations of the same phenomenon
(D) proposing a radically new solution to an old problem
(E) summarizing recent research on a topic

eschn3am · Accepted Answer

#3 says that it will increase the NUMBER of low-income residents. The passage just says it will increase the CONCENTRATION of low-income residents because many high-income citizens will leave. This leaves a higher percentage of low-income left, but it's not causing more to move in.

marcodonzelli · Answer

I thought 3 could be E.
Look at this period: Such ill-considered projects not only will fail to relieve pressures on existing cities but will, in fact, tend to weaken those cities further by drawing away high-income citizens and increasing the concentration of low-income groups that are unable to provide tax income. The remaining taxpayers......

It seems that the tax base will lower, that some residents will go away and that it will be a concentration of low income groups....so why is it A and not E?

Moreover, could someone explain me the eigth question? Please, more passages like this!!!

dharde9 · Answer

3. According to the author, ill-considered New Towns will tend to weaken existing cities in which of the following ways?
I. They will cause an erosion in the tax base of existing cities.
II. The will divert residents from existing cities to other areas.
III. They will increase the number of low-income residents in existing cities.
(A) I only
(B) II only
(C) I and II only
(D) II and III only
(E) I, II, and III

II. is not the answer as it would be sagacious to infer that, New Towns would not divert all the existing residents. Only high income residents who no longer consider that place matches their status would migrate to other cities.
III. Proportion and not the actual number of low income residents is going to increase, hence III can't be selected.

So A) is the answer.

souvikgmat1990 · Answer

Any idea why option C. I and II is incorrect in Question 3. 
In the passage it clearly says:

Such ill-considered projects not only will fail to relieve pressures on existing cities but will, in fact,  tend to weaken those cities further by drawing away high-income citizens  and increasing the concentration of low-income groups that are unable to provide tax income.

I would think high-income citizens are sub-set of the residents of the city.
Would like to see the official explanation from Manhattan on this.

ruchik · Answer

In the paragraph it says that the suburbs will tend to drive away high income citizens. But the option says it will drive away residents of the city. Now residents can include both low as well as high income. High income are small subset of residents. Hence cannot be use to justify the option. For eg: if we say people of New-York don't like football can be generalize it to say all the people of USA don't like football. Hence II is incorrect.

Hope the explanation clarifies your doubt.

Please give kudos if you like the explanation.

bM22 · Answer

5. The author’s tone in discussing “developers, builders, and financial institutions” (Highlighted) can best be described as

(A) critical
 (B) pedantic
(C) evasive
(D) captious
(E) vitriolic

Explanation: The author discusses “developers, builders, and financial institutions”, when he talks about promoters of New Towns. Throughout the passage, the author can be seen critical of the New Towns and mentions that the main interest of these promoters is economic gain. Author's tone is not pedantic or precise, evasive. He can be seen criticizing the New Towns Projects, as he feels that since European New Towns have been financially and socially successful, we cannot expect the same sorts of results in the United States and any such assumptions are incorrect.

Hope This Helps.
Thanks.

bM22 · Answer

2. The author believes that New Towns are not being built where they are genuinely needed because

(A) the government offers developers incentives to build in other areas
  (B) the promoters of New Town are motivated chiefly by self-interest  
(C) few people want to live in areas where land is still cheap
(D) no studies have been done to determine the best locations
(E) federal regulations make construction in those areas less profitable

Explanation: can be inferred from the lines: "The promoters of New Towns so far in the United States have been developers, builders, and financial institutions.  The main interest of these promoters is economic gain . Furthermore, federal regulations designed to promote the New Town idea  do not consider social needs as the European New Town plans do.  ", implying that the promoters of New Town are motivated chiefly by self-interest and do not consider social needs as European New Town plans do and will mostly encourage developments in areas where land is cheap and construction profitable rather than where New Towns are genuinely needed.

7. It can be inferred from the passage that the author considers the present American New Town formula to be

(A) thoroughly considered
  (B) insufficiently innovative  
(C) potentially workable
(D) overly restrictive
(E) financially sound

Explanation : We can answer this using PoE, as other options are clearly not what's mentioned in the passage, thus the best answer would be (B). Option B can also be inferred from the lines: "Furthermore, federal regulations designed to promote the New Town idea do not consider social needs as the European New Town plans do.  In fact, our regulations specify virtually all the ingredients of the typical suburban community, with a bit of political rhetoric thrown in. ", implying that even though the plans have been thought upon too much, still are not considered workable.

8. The author of the passage is primarily concerned with

(A) arguing for a change in policy  
(B) exploring the implications of  novel  idea
(C) comparing and contrasting two manifestations of the same phenomenon
(D) proposing a radically new solution to an old problem
(E) summarizing recent research on a topic

Explanation: Throughout the passage, author talks about the New Towns plans and how it is further and equally erroneously assumed that since European New Towns have been financially and socially successful, we can expect the same sorts of results in the United States. The author continues to argue the idea by mentioning the downsides and how the plan would not impact where it is genuinely needed and concludes the passage asking for a change in the policy. Thus A is the correct answer.

B is incorrect as the author is not exploring the implications of  novel  idea, instead the author is arguing something that was successful in Europe will probably not be so in the US.

paridhibajaj · Answer

Why is Option B in Question 8 wrong?

Sajjad1994 · Answer

(B)  is incorrect because the author is not exploring the implications of a novel idea. The passage is primarily focused on criticizing the idea of building  "New Towns"  as a solution to urban problems and pointing out the flaws in the current approach to New Town development in the United States. The author is not discussing the implications of a new idea, but rather critiquing existing practices and proposing changes to current policies. The passage does not present a neutral or balanced perspective on the topic, but rather takes a critical stance. Therefore,  (B)  is not the correct answer.

Anandanwar · Answer

Hello,

For Q1 can someone explain how to reject B?
I narrowed it down to B and C. 
For B my reasoning for rejection was that the passage does state that the federal regulations in America do not consider social needs, but European ones do. But it is not explicitly stated that the federal regulations are part of the formula. 
So rejected B. But I was not certain.

Could someone explain?
Regards,
Ankit

guddo · Answer

I’d reject (B) because it asks how  Britain differs from other European countries . The passage never makes that comparison.

It only contrasts the  United States with Europe generally  and later mentions Britain as an example of a successful national formula. So your concern about whether federal regulations are part of the formula is not really the key issue. The problem is simply that  Britain vs. other European countries is never discussed .

The idea of building New Towns to absorb growth is frequently

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 Reading Comprehension (RC) Questions

The idea of building New Towns to absorb growth is frequently

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