Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
May 1212:00 PM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Make the most of your break with the most realistic GMAT™ prep. Take up to $700 off select products.
May 1501:00 PM IST
-11:00 AM IST
Start your journey with a fully customized action plan and work with a dedicated mentor to achieve a 735+ score.
May 1810:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Join us in a live GMAT practice session and solve 25 challenging GMAT questions with other test takers in timed conditions, covering GMAT Quant, Data Sufficiency, Data Insights, Reading Comprehension, and Critical Reasoning questions.- May 19
12:00 PM PDT
-01:00 PM PDT
Scoring 329 on the GRE is not always about using more books, more courses, or a longer study plan. In this episode of GRE Success Talks, Ashutosh shares his GRE preparation strategy, study plan, and test-day experience, explaining how he kept his prep.... - Jun 10
06:00 AM PDT
-06:15 PM PDT
Register for the GMAT Club Virtual MBA Spotlight Fair – the world’s premier event for serious MBA candidates. This is your chance to hear directly from Admissions Directors at nearly every Top 30 MBA program..
19 Sep 2025, 21:12
Kudos
Bookmarks
By the late 1990s, sociologist Fred Block and political economist Peter Evans independently advanced complementary arguments regarding the role of government in fostering technological innovation in the United States. Block contended that significant technological breakthroughs often stemmed from government-led initiatives, with public agencies directing funding and resources toward high-risk, high-reward research that private firms were reluctant to pursue. This perspective challenged the prevailing notion that market forces and competition alone drove technological advancement. Evans expanded this argument, highlighting that public-private partnerships, where governments set initial agendas and incentivized firms to participate, were crucial in sectors like telecommunications, semiconductors, renewable energy, and biotechnology.
Block and Evans’ assertions are difficult to refute. However, the involvement of government agencies did not always yield uniform results across industries, nor did private firms consistently welcome state intervention. In the late 1980s, many semiconductor firms initially resisted the creation of SEMATECH, a public-private consortium designed to revitalize the U.S. semiconductor industry. Despite this resistance, SEMATECH ultimately played a pivotal role in improving production techniques and fostering industry collaboration, setting new standards for cooperative innovation. Similarly, in the aerospace sector, companies varied in their response to NASA’s attempts to involve private firms in developing satellite technology—some firms embraced the opportunity, while others expressed concerns about intellectual property rights, competitive neutrality, and long-term market competition.
Which of the following, if true, would most clearly call into question one of Block’s conclusions?
A. Private agencies primarily allocated resources to low-risk projects with short development timelines, avoiding long-term investments in speculative technologies.
B. Government-funded projects in the biotechnology sector during the late 1980s yielded limited commercial success.
C. Several aerospace firms declined to participate in NASA’s satellite development programs due to intellectual property concerns.
D. Telecommunications firms lobbied against public-private partnerships, citing fears of increased competition from new market entrants.
E. Several technological breakthroughs during the 1980s emerged from private firms that only later received government support.
Block and Evans’ assertions are difficult to refute. However, the involvement of government agencies did not always yield uniform results across industries, nor did private firms consistently welcome state intervention. In the late 1980s, many semiconductor firms initially resisted the creation of SEMATECH, a public-private consortium designed to revitalize the U.S. semiconductor industry. Despite this resistance, SEMATECH ultimately played a pivotal role in improving production techniques and fostering industry collaboration, setting new standards for cooperative innovation. Similarly, in the aerospace sector, companies varied in their response to NASA’s attempts to involve private firms in developing satellite technology—some firms embraced the opportunity, while others expressed concerns about intellectual property rights, competitive neutrality, and long-term market competition.
Which of the following, if true, would most clearly call into question one of Block’s conclusions?
A. Private agencies primarily allocated resources to low-risk projects with short development timelines, avoiding long-term investments in speculative technologies.
B. Government-funded projects in the biotechnology sector during the late 1980s yielded limited commercial success.
C. Several aerospace firms declined to participate in NASA’s satellite development programs due to intellectual property concerns.
D. Telecommunications firms lobbied against public-private partnerships, citing fears of increased competition from new market entrants.
E. Several technological breakthroughs during the 1980s emerged from private firms that only later received government support.
19 Sep 2025, 21:12
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Solution:
By the late 1990s, sociologist Fred Block and political economist Peter Evans independently advanced complementary arguments regarding the role of government in fostering technological innovation in the United States. Block contended that significant technological breakthroughs often stemmed from government-led initiatives, with public agencies directing funding and resources toward high-risk, high-reward research that private firms were reluctant to pursue. This perspective challenged the prevailing notion that market forces and competition alone drove technological advancement. Evans expanded this argument, highlighting that public-private partnerships, where governments set initial agendas and incentivized firms to participate, were crucial in sectors like telecommunications, semiconductors, renewable energy, and biotechnology.
Block and Evans’ assertions are difficult to refute. However, the involvement of government agencies did not always yield uniform results across industries, nor did private firms consistently welcome state intervention. In the late 1980s, many semiconductor firms initially resisted the creation of SEMATECH, a public-private consortium designed to revitalize the U.S. semiconductor industry. Despite this resistance, SEMATECH ultimately played a pivotal role in improving production techniques and fostering industry collaboration, setting new standards for cooperative innovation. Similarly, in the aerospace sector, companies varied in their response to NASA’s attempts to involve private firms in developing satellite technology—some firms embraced the opportunity, while others expressed concerns about intellectual property rights, competitive neutrality, and long-term market competition.
Which of the following, if true, would most clearly call into question one of Block’s conclusions?
A. Private agencies primarily allocated resources to low-risk projects with short development timelines, avoiding long-term investments in speculative technologies.
B. Government-funded projects in the biotechnology sector during the late 1980s yielded limited commercial success.
C. Several aerospace firms declined to participate in NASA’s satellite development programs due to intellectual property concerns.
D. Telecommunications firms lobbied against public-private partnerships, citing fears of increased competition from new market entrants.
E. Several technological breakthroughs during the 1980s emerged from private firms that only later received government support.
A) Incorrect
Block’s claim centers on public agencies driving high-risk innovation. Actions by private agencies do not contradict that claim.
B) Incorrect
Limited success in one field does not undercut the broader point that public agencies play a vital role across sectors.
C) Incorrect
Firm resistance to collaboration is acknowledged in the passage and does not refute the claim that public agencies drive innovation.
D) Incorrect
Lobbying against partnerships shows opposition from firms, not a failure of government-led innovation.
E) Correct
If major breakthroughs began in private firms before any government support, that would challenge Block’s claim that public agencies lead the innovation process.
Answer: E
By the late 1990s, sociologist Fred Block and political economist Peter Evans independently advanced complementary arguments regarding the role of government in fostering technological innovation in the United States. Block contended that significant technological breakthroughs often stemmed from government-led initiatives, with public agencies directing funding and resources toward high-risk, high-reward research that private firms were reluctant to pursue. This perspective challenged the prevailing notion that market forces and competition alone drove technological advancement. Evans expanded this argument, highlighting that public-private partnerships, where governments set initial agendas and incentivized firms to participate, were crucial in sectors like telecommunications, semiconductors, renewable energy, and biotechnology.
Block and Evans’ assertions are difficult to refute. However, the involvement of government agencies did not always yield uniform results across industries, nor did private firms consistently welcome state intervention. In the late 1980s, many semiconductor firms initially resisted the creation of SEMATECH, a public-private consortium designed to revitalize the U.S. semiconductor industry. Despite this resistance, SEMATECH ultimately played a pivotal role in improving production techniques and fostering industry collaboration, setting new standards for cooperative innovation. Similarly, in the aerospace sector, companies varied in their response to NASA’s attempts to involve private firms in developing satellite technology—some firms embraced the opportunity, while others expressed concerns about intellectual property rights, competitive neutrality, and long-term market competition.
Which of the following, if true, would most clearly call into question one of Block’s conclusions?
A. Private agencies primarily allocated resources to low-risk projects with short development timelines, avoiding long-term investments in speculative technologies.
B. Government-funded projects in the biotechnology sector during the late 1980s yielded limited commercial success.
C. Several aerospace firms declined to participate in NASA’s satellite development programs due to intellectual property concerns.
D. Telecommunications firms lobbied against public-private partnerships, citing fears of increased competition from new market entrants.
E. Several technological breakthroughs during the 1980s emerged from private firms that only later received government support.
A) Incorrect
Block’s claim centers on public agencies driving high-risk innovation. Actions by private agencies do not contradict that claim.
B) Incorrect
Limited success in one field does not undercut the broader point that public agencies play a vital role across sectors.
C) Incorrect
Firm resistance to collaboration is acknowledged in the passage and does not refute the claim that public agencies drive innovation.
D) Incorrect
Lobbying against partnerships shows opposition from firms, not a failure of government-led innovation.
E) Correct
If major breakthroughs began in private firms before any government support, that would challenge Block’s claim that public agencies lead the innovation process.
Answer: E
