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.
Apr 2912:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
Apr 3001:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
May 0111:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
May 0306:30 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Verbal trouble on GMAT? Fix it NOW! Join Sunita Singhvi for a focused webinar on actionable strategies to boost your Verbal score and take your performance to the next level.
01 Nov 2021, 07:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
E
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
45%
(medium)
Question Stats:
67% (02:02) correct
33%
(02:10)
wrong
based on 624
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Journalist: Many people object to mandatory retirement at age 65 as being arbitrary, arguing that people over 65 make useful contributions. However, if those who reach 65 are permitted to continue working indefinitely, we will face unacceptable outcomes. First, young people entering the job market will not be able to obtain decent jobs in the professions for which they were trained, resulting in widespread dissatisfaction among the young. Second, it is not fair for those who have worked 40 or more years to deprive others of opportunities. Therefore, mandatory retirement should be retained.
The journalist’s argument depends on assuming which one of the following?
(A) Anyone who has worked 40 years is at least 65 years old.
(B) All young people entering the job market are highly trained professionals.
(C) It is unfair for a person not to get a job in the profession for which that person was trained.
(D) If people are forced to retire at age 65, there will be much dissatisfaction among at least some older people.
(E) If retirement ceases to be mandatory at age 65, at least some people will choose to work past age 65.
The journalist’s argument depends on assuming which one of the following?
(A) Anyone who has worked 40 years is at least 65 years old.
(B) All young people entering the job market are highly trained professionals.
(C) It is unfair for a person not to get a job in the profession for which that person was trained.
(D) If people are forced to retire at age 65, there will be much dissatisfaction among at least some older people.
(E) If retirement ceases to be mandatory at age 65, at least some people will choose to work past age 65.
06 Nov 2021, 05:15
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel
EXPLANATION FROM Fox LSAT
The journalist wants to keep the current mandatory retirement policy. Why? Because of “unacceptable outcomes” if we don’t. Okay, but why? Well, because 1) young people won’t get jobs and will therefore be dissatisfied, and 2) it is not “fair” to let old people deprive others of opportunities. You wanna guess what I think of this logic?
Yes, you are right, I think it sucks. If I was going to object to the journalist, here’s what I would say: First of all, I do not give a damn about young people. Young people shouldn’t get jobs anyway, because they don’t know anything. Furthermore, I don’t care whether they are “dissatisfied.” Young people don’t do anything but whine anyway. Show me a young person who is not dissatisfied! So, basically, **** ‘em.
Second, nobody ever said that life has to be “fair.” What does this even mean? Is it “fair” to make someone who has worked for 40 years to create a great job for themselves leave that job? What if it’s the only thing in the world that makes them happy? What if their clients/customers/patients depend on them? How is it “fair” to make someone quit a job?
Note that I don’t believe any of what I just said. I’m being a lawyer. Which you should do too, if you want to do well on the LSAT.
We’re asked to find a Necessary Assumption in the journalist’s argument. My guess is that the journalist has assumed 1) we give a **** about kids’ dissatisfaction, and/or 2) there is even such a possible thing as “fairness” in any meaningful sense of the word, and/or 3) if there is such thing as “fairness,” it is something we give a **** about pursuing.
A) This is not at all what we were looking for, and it doesn’t seem necessary. If A isn’t true, then it’s possible that there are some 60 year olds who have worked 40 years. Maybe the journalist would also like them to be forced into retirement, but that wouldn’t mean that the current policy of retirement at 65 should be abolished.
B) Nah. This one is way too strong and absolute for a Necessary Assumption question. If B is false, it becomes, “Some young people are not highly trained professionals.” If that was true, the journalist would say, “So what? We should still make room for them to get jobs.”
C) Uh, maybe. I don’t know. If this is untrue, then maybe the “fairness” argument falls apart. But the journalist would still have his “dissatisfaction” argument to rely on. So maybe C isn’t “necessary.”
D) This would weaken the argument. If we’re looking for an assumption, then we’re looking for something that is on the side of the journalist. We want something that, if not true, would weaken the journalist’s argument. I don’t love C, but it’s still the only possible contender so far.
E) Okay, this is better. It doesn’t match my rant, but if this answer isn’t true then it becomes “nobody would ever voluntarily work past 65.” If that’s the case, then why would we need a mandatory retirement age of 65? I think E is necessary support for the journalist’s argument, because if it’s not true then the argument fails.
Our answer is E.
30 Jan 2023, 09:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
Journalist: Many people object to mandatory retirement at age 65 as being arbitrary, arguing that people over 65 make useful contributions. However, if those who reach 65 are permitted to continue working indefinitely, we will face unacceptable outcomes. First, young people entering the job market will not be able to obtain decent jobs in the professions for which they were trained, resulting in widespread dissatisfaction among the young. Second, it is not fair for those who have worked 40 or more years to deprive others of opportunities. Therefore, mandatory retirement should be retained.
The journalist’s argument depends on assuming which one of the following?
(A) Anyone who has worked 40 years is at least 65 years old. - WRONG. Irrelevant.
(B) All young people entering the job market are highly trained professionals. - WRONG. Not necessary and most importantly irrelevant at core.
(C) It is unfair for a person not to get a job in the profession for which that person was trained. - WRONG. May or may not be so. Person's capability plays a role specifically here.
(D) If people are forced to retire at age 65, there will be much dissatisfaction among at least some older people. - WRONG. Wrong direction.
(E) If retirement ceases to be mandatory at age 65, at least some people will choose to work past age 65. - CORRECT. Only if some older people work later after 65 then young ones would not get jobs and thus be dissatisfied. If older ones don't work past 65 then Journalist's claim of outcomes would not be there. Perfectly sets as assumption.
Answer E.
The journalist’s argument depends on assuming which one of the following?
(A) Anyone who has worked 40 years is at least 65 years old. - WRONG. Irrelevant.
(B) All young people entering the job market are highly trained professionals. - WRONG. Not necessary and most importantly irrelevant at core.
(C) It is unfair for a person not to get a job in the profession for which that person was trained. - WRONG. May or may not be so. Person's capability plays a role specifically here.
(D) If people are forced to retire at age 65, there will be much dissatisfaction among at least some older people. - WRONG. Wrong direction.
(E) If retirement ceases to be mandatory at age 65, at least some people will choose to work past age 65. - CORRECT. Only if some older people work later after 65 then young ones would not get jobs and thus be dissatisfied. If older ones don't work past 65 then Journalist's claim of outcomes would not be there. Perfectly sets as assumption.
Answer E.
