Although many claim, rightfully so, that selfish interests

Question

Although many claim, rightfully so, that selfish interests dictate policy in the United States government’s international aid programs, and that such aid is used to support right-wing dictatorships, it is nevertheless true that these programs bring much-needed food and other life giving commodities to destitute, innocent people

Which of the following, if true, is most damaging to the argument above?

A: The distribution of food and medicines in these foreign countries is always controlled by government officials, who invariably use them for political and personal rewards.
 
B: Literacy textbooks prepared under the direction of the United States Central Intelligence Agency include lessons on the disadvantages of communism.
 
C: Most of the food used in these programs is from crops purchased by the American government from American farmers through subsidy programs designed to improve the American economy.

D: In countries that do not receive aid from the United States, thousands die each year from starvation and disease.
 
E: Governments classified as right wing receive over 78 percent of the total U.S. expenditures for international development programs; governments classified as socialist receive less than 12 percent.

vards · Accepted Answer

3) Although many claim, rightfully so, that selfish interests dictate policy in the United States government’s international aid programs, and that such aid is used to support right-wing dictatorships, it is nevertheless true that these programs bring much-needed food and other life-giving commodities to destitute, innocent people.

Which of the following, if true, is most damaging to the argument above?

A)The distribution of food and medicines in these foreign countries is always controlled by government officials, who invariably use them for political and personal rewards.

B)Literacy textbooks prepared under the direction of the United States Central Intelligence Agency include lessons on the disadvantages of communism.

C)Most of the food used in these programs is from crops purchased by the American government from American farmers through subsidy programs designed to improve the American economy.

D)In countries that do not receive aid from the United States, thousands die each year from starvation and disease.

E)Governments classified as right wing receive over 78 percent of the total U.S. expenditures for international development programs; governments classified as socialist receive less than 12 percent.

ALL THE BEST GUYS..HOPE EVRYONE GETS IT RIGHT..!! :-D

...IN DEEP NEED OF KUDOS BTW :-D

...IN DEEP NEED OF KUDOS BTW :-D

Orange08 · Answer

I mistakenly narrowed down the answer to C.

whiplash2411 · Answer

Conclusion: The international aid programs help the destitute people.

arundas · Answer

Straight A. I think thats the only option that makes sense.

intellijat · Answer

hmmm.......its clearly  A  
it states...these programs bring much-needed food and other life giving commodities to destitute, innocent people...but what if those who control the distribution use them for political and personal gains and it never reaches the needy.It would take the wind out of the argument.

ichha148 · Answer

This is a weaken question

find the conclusion and then the choice that weakens the conclusion

conclusion:-
it is nevertheless true that these programs bring much-needed food and other life giving commodities to destitute, innocent people

A -The distribution of food and medicines in these foreign countries is always controlled by government officials, who invariably use them for political and personal rewards.  directly weakens this conclusions . if the distribution is controlled by officials who use them for personal rewards then this may not be helping innocent people

rest all choices does not weaken the conclusion .
Ans:A

tingle15 · Answer

A: The distribution of food and medicines in these foreign countries is always controlled by government officials, who invariably use them for political and personal rewards. ==>  Correct.

B: Literacy textbooks prepared under the direction of the United States Central Intelligence Agency include lessons on the disadvantages of communism. ==>  No effect

C: Most of the food used in these programs is from crops purchased by the American government from American farmers through subsidy programs designed to improve the American economy. ==>  Strengthen. Whatever be it, US govt programs bring much-needed food. 
D: In countries that do not receive aid from the United States, thousands die each year from starvation and disease. ==>  Strengthen

E: Governments classified as right wing receive over 78 percent of the total U.S. expenditures for international development programs; governments classified as socialist receive less than 12 percent. ==>  No effect

SJD · Answer

A seems correct per your descriptions.

E seems to actual strengthen arguement (does not seem out-of-scope or irrelevant, but supportive of argument)

ctkrishnan · Answer

Pretty straight forward.. A..

Luizonho · Answer

I have a stupid question.

The question asks to weaken the argument and not the conclusion. The argument wouldn´t be that this policy is selfish and helps only dictators?

Should I always go straight to weaken the conclusion in this kind of question, no matter if the question refers to conclusion or argument?

Temurkhon · Answer

Conclusion is a part of argument, moreover, there is no argument without conclusion. You are right, when you see such questions, go directly conclusion this is what answer choices should weaken or strengthen

Ameya85 · Answer

From the argument, we can come to conclusion that whatever may the motive be, in the end, the program is helping needy people. Any answer that proves that these people are not getting benefited despite the aid is the right answer. Only A stand in this case. If food and medicines distributed to needy nations are not reaching the people, instead, government officials of that country are using the given aid for its own interest, then conclusion isn't true.

- A

- A

DmitryFarberMPrep · Answer

This isn't really an argument in the GMAT sense. It starts with a counterpremise that it accepts, and then it draws a conclusion that has no premise to support it. Answer choice A weakens in that it contradicts the conclusion, but you're not likely to see anything like that on the test. Also, most of the wrong answer choices are too wildly out of scope to be tempting. You're much better off studying from the Official Guide!

arnabs · Answer

Dmitry, Please confirm my understanding.
from what i can see, i can find this as the conclusion.

"selfish interests drive these policies".

if we can weaken this fact by logically saying that "selfish interests DO NOT drive these policies", i think that can be a weakener. A seemed a little to wayward for me; PERSONAL REWARDS?? That clearly created some ambiguity.

For me, I think C can be an answer. I was a little skeptical about the content of the argument as well. Your help would be appreciated..

DmitryFarberMPrep · Answer

The problem with identifying the conclusion as "selfish interests drive these policies" is that this point runs counter to everything else the author says.

Imagine that I said "Product X is poorly made, but it has a number of useful features and is more affordable than most competing products." What is my conclusion? I start out criticizing Product X, and then I point out some good things about it. If anything, it seems that I am on the way to recommending Product X, at least in a limited fashion. However, I never do come to a conclusion, so  this is not an argument .

The original "argument" is the same. It seems that the author is moving toward an endorsement of US aid programs, but no such endorsement actually occurs. In real life, we might simply guess at the author's intent, but we will never have to do that on the GMAT, As for the initial statement about selfish purposes, there is no support whatsoever for that statement. On the GMAT, an unsupported statement is always a premise (or counterpremise)--it will never be the conclusion.

mvictor · Answer

the argument is in favor of aid programs for the countries in which right-wing dictatorships are present. 
to weaken the argument, we can say that the benefits are not distributed accordingly, and dictators use these sources to increase their popularity, and thus maintain the power.
A exactly says this.

Adityagmatclub · Answer

I mark C as an answer, which is irrelevant as B,D and E.
we need to mark a weakener for this question, and only weakener, we can suggest from above choices is ANSWER-A
Two conclusion-
USA gives these aid for their benefits --->(ring wings)--> but govt officials use this aid for their benefit (weakener).
Helps in removal of poverty-->govt officials use this aid for their benefit (weakener).

sallysea · Answer

Merged topics. Please, search before posting questions!

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Although many claim, rightfully so, that selfish interests

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

Although many claim, rightfully so, that selfish interests

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