It is currently 12 Dec 2017, 05:28

### 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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Weaken by Causation, the governor Verdant argument...

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
Manager
Joined: 25 Aug 2004
Posts: 170

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 0

Location: MONTREAL
Weaken by Causation, the governor Verdant argument... [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Aug 2005, 16:05
While governor Verdant has been in office, the stateâ€™s budget has increased by an average of 6 percent each year. While the previous governor was in office, the stateâ€™s budget increased by an average of 11 and a half percent each year. Obviously, the austere budgets during governor Verdantâ€™s term have caused the slowdown in the growth in state spending.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion drawn above?

(A) The rate of inflation in the state averaged 10 percent each year during the previous governorâ€™s term in office and 3 percent each year during Verdantâ€™s term.
(B) Both federal and state income tax rates have been lowered considerably during Verdantâ€™s term in office.
(C) In each year of Verdantâ€™s term in office, the stateâ€™s budget has shown some increase in spending over the previous year.
(D) During Verdantâ€™s term in office, the state has either discontinued or begun to charge private citizens for numerous services that the state offered free to citizens during the previous governorâ€™s term
(E) During the previous governorâ€™s term in office, the state introduced several so-called â€˜austerityâ€™ budgets intended to reduce the growth in state spending.

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 28 Jun 2005
Posts: 211

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

20 Aug 2005, 20:14
It should be E; it talks about austerity budgets introduced during the previous governor's term

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 24 Sep 2003
Posts: 38

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Location: India

### Show Tags

21 Aug 2005, 00:11
OA should be A.

Explaination: The rate of inlation in the state averaged 10 percent each year during the previous governor's term. So effectively, State spending in his tenure was 1.5 percent on an average.
The rate of inlation in the state averaged 6 percent each year during the verdant's term. So effectively, State spending in his tenure was 3 percent on an average, which is more than the state spending in previous governor's term.
_________________

Vipin Gupta

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 104

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Location: Sofia, Bulgaria

### Show Tags

21 Aug 2005, 01:12
I'm gonna go with E.

smarty_cry, although I agree with your reasoning:
1) We do not know if the figures quoted in the passage are nominal or real values. I'm not sure we can assume they are nominal.

2) We are looking to undermine the conclusion that Verdant's policy caused the slowdown. As I understand the passage, the slowdown is a fact and we are questioning its cause, not its existence.

E suggests that the previous governor might be responsible for the slowdown, so the conclusion in the passage is undermined.

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 25 Aug 2004
Posts: 170

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 0

Location: MONTREAL

### Show Tags

21 Aug 2005, 06:38
If the austery budgets during the previous governor term's are the cause of the economy slowdown, than it is not true that the austere budgets during governor verdant's have caused the slowdown. I will go for E.

but, it looks like the OA is A???

I don't think my reasoning is right here...

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 104

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Location: Sofia, Bulgaria

### Show Tags

21 Aug 2005, 07:39
mbassmbass04 wrote:
If the austery budgets during the previous governor term's are the cause of the economy slowdown, than it is not true that the austere budgets during governor verdant's have caused the slowdown. I will go for E.

but, it looks like the OA is A???

I don't think my reasoning is right here...

If the OA is A, then smarty_cry got the right explanation.

Nevertheless, it's not a good question, because you have to assume that the quoted growth figures are in nominal terms (unadjusted for inflation) to arrive at A as the correct answer.

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 278

Kudos [?]: 88 [0], given: 0

Location: CA, USA

### Show Tags

21 Aug 2005, 20:59
mbassmbass04 wrote:
If the austery budgets during the previous governor term's are the cause of the economy slowdown, than it is not true that the austere budgets during governor verdant's have caused the slowdown. I will go for E.

but, it looks like the OA is A???

I don't think my reasoning is right here...

The austerity budgets in previous government term might not have had the same scale (or enforced as vigorously) as the ones in Verdant's term. Is that possible ? But anyway, my reasoning is not supported by the paragraph.

Kudos [?]: 88 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 1705

Kudos [?]: 101 [0], given: 0

Re: Weaken by Causation, the governor Verdant argument... [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Aug 2005, 22:12
mbassmbass04 wrote:
While governor Verdant has been in office, the stateâ€™s budget has increased by an average of 6 percent each year. While the previous governor was in office, the stateâ€™s budget increased by an average of 11 and a half percent each year. Obviously, the austere budgets during governor Verdantâ€™s term have caused the slowdown in the growth in state spending.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion drawn above?

(A) The rate of inflation in the state averaged 10 percent each year during the previous governorâ€™s term in office and 3 percent each year during Verdantâ€™s term.

(E) During the previous governorâ€™s term in office, the state introduced several so-called â€˜austerityâ€™ budgets intended to reduce the growth in state spending.

E actually strengthen the argument. it says â€˜austerityâ€™ budgets intended to reduce the growth in state spending where as as A says the rate of increase/decrease in budget is caused by inflation, not by the austere budgets.

So A shuld be the answer.

Kudos [?]: 101 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 25 Aug 2004
Posts: 170

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 0

Location: MONTREAL

### Show Tags

22 Aug 2005, 01:28
Himalaya,

I don't agree with you that E strenghten the argument, because the argument is focusing on the actual governor Verdant's term, while E refers to the previous governor's term...

OA is still A from V-study Material, it is an Old official GMAT question...

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 0

22 Aug 2005, 01:28
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Weaken by Causation, the governor Verdant argument...

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.