Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 29 May 2017, 05:35

### 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...

Author Message
Manager
Joined: 25 Aug 2004
Posts: 169
Location: MONTREAL
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 0

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.
If you have any questions
New!
Manager
Joined: 28 Jun 2005
Posts: 214
Followers: 1

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
Intern
Joined: 24 Sep 2003
Posts: 38
Location: India
Followers: 1

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

### 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

Manager
Joined: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 104
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
Followers: 1

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

### 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.
Manager
Joined: 25 Aug 2004
Posts: 169
Location: MONTREAL
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 0

### 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...
Manager
Joined: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 104
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
Followers: 1

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

### 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.
Senior Manager
Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 279
Location: CA, USA
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 0

### 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.
SVP
Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 1711
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 79 [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.
Manager
Joined: 25 Aug 2004
Posts: 169
Location: MONTREAL
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 0

### 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...
22 Aug 2005, 01:28
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Weakening/Strengthen and Argument 1 16 Jun 2016, 10:10
1 Weaken OR Evaluate? 2 27 Nov 2014, 09:36
Causation question 4 07 Apr 2008, 13:31
I14. Weaken 7 27 Feb 2008, 23:24
I7. Weaken 4 27 Feb 2008, 04:35
Display posts from previous: Sort by