I will go with option B for the above CR.
IMO D.
A very imp point in this argument is that the argument does not say the Govt money will be sufficient for students' college expenses. It just says it will help them obtain more money.
The plan will be flawed if the very ground on this money could be provided is missing on many occasions. D clearly states that.
Low-income students are often unable to get enough financial aid for college. One government program would give low-income students half the amount of their weekly salaries from on-campus jobs to put toward college expenses. This program would make it possible for all low-income students to receive more money for college.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously calls into question the claim that the program would make it possible for all low-income students to obtain more money for college?
(A) The average low-income student spends more than half the amount of their weekly salary from on-campus jobs on yearly school expenses.
(B) Some low-income students may not want to spend the extra government money from on-campus jobs on school expenses.
(C) The reduction in government revenues stemming from giving students half of their weekly salaries from on-campus jobs will necessitate cuts in other government programs, such as grants for community programs.
(D) Because there are limited numbers of positions available at universities, many low-income students are unable to obtain on-campus jobs.
(E) Salaries for on-campus jobs have decreased substantially over the past ten years, reducing the money that low-income students have available to spend on school expenses.
Tough call between C & E. But E wins IMO.
The chain of events has become cyclic, as stated by E. These events are mutually fostering one another, making the overall situaion even worse than before.
A credit card company's new operations center experienced technical glitches and was forced close temporarily, causing many customer payments not to be processed. As a result, the credit card company ran low on liquid funds, making it difficult for the company to reopen the center. This, in turn, placed pressure on the company's other operations centers to increase their employees' hours in order to handle the additional work.
Which of the following, if true, considered together with the information above, most strongly supports the conclusion that it will continue to be difficult for the credit card company to reopen the new operations center?
(A) The company does not plan to open any additional new centers in the near future.
(B) Since its primary task was processing merchant reimbursements, the new center processed only a small number of customer payments.
(C) Although the remedy for the technical failure at the new center is apparent, its underlying causes have proven difficult to determine.
(D) Since the new center was managed by a third party, certain technical difficulties were likely to occur.
(E) Employees at the company's centers who work longer hours tend to experience higher error rates, causing many payments not to be processed
OA is E.
Thanks!
Corporate Strategist: It is generally true that a reduction in the price of a good results in an increase in the demand for this product, leading to higher sales. However, I believe that the managements strategy of stimulating the sales of our luxury cars by implementing a series of aggressive price reductions is seriously flawed. Dramatic price reductions on our luxury cars will erode the image of exclusivity and premium quality associated with these vehicles. If our cars become substantially cheaper, they will no longer represent the symbol of status and financial success, thus losing their main appeal to our customers.
Which of the following statements best describes the role of each portion in boldface in the argument above?
a. The first represents the main position of the corporate strategist; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that position.
b. The first is an assumption made by the corporate strategist about the efficacy of the managements strategy; the second is evidence that supports the strategists reasoning.
c. The first is evidence supporting the main position of the corporate strategist; the second is that position.
d. The first is evidence supporting the position of the corporate strategist; the second is a generalization that will not hold in the case at issue.
e. The first is the main position of the corporate strategist; the second is evidence in support of that position.
Low-income students are often unable to get enough financial aid for college. One government program would give low-income students half the amount of their weekly salaries from on-campus jobs to put toward college expenses. This program would make it possible for all low-income students to receive more money for college.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously calls into question the claim that the program would make it possible for all low-income students to obtain more money for college?
(A) The average low-income student spends more than half the amount of their weekly salary from on-campus jobs on yearly school expenses.
(B) Some low-income students may not want to spend the extra government money from on-campus jobs on school expenses.
(C) The reduction in government revenues stemming from giving students half of their weekly salaries from on-campus jobs will necessitate cuts in other government programs, such as grants for community programs.
(D) Because there are limited numbers of positions available at universities, many low-income students are unable to obtain on-campus jobs.
(E) Salaries for on-campus jobs have decreased substantially over the past ten years, reducing the money that low-income students have available to spend on school expenses.
Call between D/E..My take is D)...as it states that many of them don't have job hence they will not recieve the half of the amount => Can't use word: "benifit for ALL"
A credit card company's new operations center experienced technical glitches and was forced close temporarily, causing many customer payments not to be processed. As a result, the credit card company ran low on liquid funds, making it difficult for the company to reopen the center. This, in turn, placed pressure on the company's other operations centers to increase their employees' hours in order to handle the additional work.
Which of the following, if true, considered together with the information above, most strongly supports the conclusion that it will continue to be difficult for the credit card company to reopen the new operations center?
(A) The company does not plan to open any additional new centers in the near future.
(B) Since its primary task was processing merchant reimbursements, the new center processed only a small number of customer payments.
(C) Although the remedy for the technical failure at the new center is apparent, its underlying causes have proven difficult to determine.
(D) Since the new center was managed by a third party, certain technical difficulties were likely to occur.
(E) Employees at the company's centers who work longer hours tend to experience higher error rates, causing many payments not to be processed
IMO - (E)...using this, we can say that it will endure the liquidity issue and the center will not be opened...
Low-income students are often unable to get enough financial aid for college. One government program would give low-income students half the amount of their weekly salaries from on-campus jobs to put toward college expenses. This program would make it possible for all low-income students to receive more money for college.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously calls into question the claim that the program would make it possible for all low-income students to obtain more money for college?
(A) The average low-income student spends more than half the amount of their weekly salary from on-campus jobs on yearly school expenses.
(B) Some low-income students may not want to spend the extra government money from on-campus jobs on school expenses.
(C) The reduction in government revenues stemming from giving students half of their weekly salaries from on-campus jobs will necessitate cuts in other government programs, such as grants for community programs.
(D) Because there are limited numbers of positions available at universities, many low-income students are unable to obtain on-campus jobs.
(E) Salaries for on-campus jobs have decreased substantially over the past ten years, reducing the money that low-income students have available to spend on school expenses.
I felt tempted to choose E on this one. But, I would still go with D.
A credit card company's new operations center experienced technical glitches and was forced close temporarily, causing many customer payments not to be processed. As a result, the credit card company ran low on liquid funds, making it difficult for the company to reopen the center. This, in turn, placed pressure on the company's other operations centers to increase their employees' hours in order to handle the additional work.
Which of the following, if true, considered together with the information above, most strongly supports the conclusion that it will continue to be difficult for the credit card company to reopen the new operations center?
(A) The company does not plan to open any additional new centers in the near future.
(B) Since its primary task was processing merchant reimbursements, the new center processed only a small number of customer payments.
(C) Although the remedy for the technical failure at the new center is apparent, its underlying causes have proven difficult to determine.
(D) Since the new center was managed by a third party, certain technical difficulties were likely to occur.
(E) Employees at the company's centers who work longer hours tend to experience higher error rates, causing many payments not to be processed
IMO: E
Since the efficiency of employees is impacted, this option is best suited to complement the situation of retarding the new center opening.
Darth Maul.. I know u know the OA, so attempting to expln the login behind this puzzle..
Introduction:
Low-income students are often unable to get enough financial aid for college.
Workaround/Proposal:
One government program would give low-income students half the amount of their weekly salaries from on-campus jobs to put toward college expenses.
Conclusion:
This program would make it possible for all low-income students to receive more money for college.
the highlighted portion above wud be true only if there are enuff jobs for all the students..
hence option D calls into question the conclusion above..
hope that helps...
Low-income students are often unable to get enough financial aid for college. One government program would give low-income students half the amount of their weekly salaries from on-campus jobs to put toward college expenses. This program would make it possible for all low-income students to receive more money for college.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously calls into question the claim that the program would make it possible for all low-income students to obtain more money for college?
(A) The average low-income student spends more than half the amount of their weekly salary from on-campus jobs on yearly school expenses.
(B) Some low-income students may not want to spend the extra government money from on-campus jobs on school expenses.
(C) The reduction in government revenues stemming from giving students half of their weekly salaries from on-campus jobs will necessitate cuts in other government programs, such as grants for community programs.
(D) Because there are limited numbers of positions available at universities, many low-income students are unable to obtain on-campus jobs.
(E) Salaries for on-campus jobs have decreased substantially over the past ten years, reducing the money that low-income students have available to spend on school expenses.
IMO B
If the current minimum wage was the only factor to increase teenage unemployment, as the argument states, the unemployment rate wouldnt have increased while min wage remained constant. There may be other factors such as :
1. Increase in teenage population
2. Decrease in jobs etc
Plz share the OA.
option b my opinion
Low-income students are often unable to get enough financial aid for college. One government program would give low-income students half the amount of their weekly salaries from on-campus jobs to put toward college expenses. This program would make it possible for all low-income students to receive more money for college.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously calls into question the claim that the program would make it possible for all low-income students to obtain more money for college?
(A) The average low-income student spends more than half the amount of their weekly salary from on-campus jobs on yearly school expenses.
(B) Some low-income students may not want to spend the extra government money from on-campus jobs on school expenses.
(C) The reduction in government revenues stemming from giving students half of their weekly salaries from on-campus jobs will necessitate cuts in other government programs, such as grants for community programs.
(D) Because there are limited numbers of positions available at universities, many low-income students are unable to obtain on-campus jobs.
(E) Salaries for on-campus jobs have decreased substantially over the past ten years, reducing the money that low-income students have available to spend on school expenses.
OA is D
thanks
A credit card company's new operations center experienced technical glitches and was forced close temporarily, causing many customer payments not to be processed. As a result, the credit card company ran low on liquid funds, making it difficult for the company to reopen the center. This, in turn, placed pressure on the company's other operations centers to increase their employees' hours in order to handle the additional work.
Which of the following, if true, considered together with the information above, most strongly supports the conclusion that it will continue to be difficult for the credit card company to reopen the new operations center?
(A) The company does not plan to open any additional new centers in the near future.
(B) Since its primary task was processing merchant reimbursements, the new center processed only a small number of customer payments.
(C) Although the remedy for the technical failure at the new center is apparent, its underlying causes have proven difficult to determine.
(D) Since the new center was managed by a third party, certain technical difficulties were likely to occur.
(E) Employees at the company's centers who work longer hours tend to experience higher error rates, causing many payments not to be processed
OA is E
thanks
everybody got this right... can anyone explain this
IMO B
If the current minimum wage was the only factor to increase teenage unemployment, as the argument states, the unemployment rate wouldnt have increased while min wage remained constant. There may be other factors such as :
1. Increase in teenage population
2. Decrease in jobs etc
Plz share the OA.
OA-> B
thanks! wats d prob wid choice D??
OA is E
thanks
everybody got this right... can anyone explain this
A- Here we r dealing wid a prob associated wid particular centre..opening additional new centres wont help in opening d said centre..
B- looks irrelevant..doesn't help to reopen d centre..
C-talks bout tecnical failure analysis..once its solved, d centre can b reopened & continue to operate till next glitch..
D-again collapses wid same reasoning..
E-talks about even if the centre is reopened, it wont b able to process payments due to high error rates..good reason!!!!
Low-income students are often unable to get enough financial aid for college. One government program would give low-income students half the amount of their weekly salaries from on-campus jobs to put toward college expenses. This program would make it possible for all low-income students to receive more money for college.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously calls into question the claim that the program would make it possible for all low-income students to obtain more money for college?
(A) The average low-income student spends more than half the amount of their weekly salary from on-campus jobs on yearly school expenses.
(B) Some low-income students may not want to spend the extra government money from on-campus jobs on school expenses.
(C) The reduction in government revenues stemming from giving students half of their weekly salaries from on-campus jobs will necessitate cuts in other government programs, such as grants for community programs.
(D) Because there are limited numbers of positions available at universities, many low-income students are unable to obtain on-campus jobs.
(E) Salaries for on-campus jobs have decreased substantially over the past ten years, reducing the money that low-income students have available to spend on school expenses.
My answer is in color.
Salary from which college education was getting funded itself got reduced this weakens most among all other options.
amsey1382 SaysPingu, Please post the answers...
Hey guys, I am really Sorry. I haven't been browsing much off late, bit busy brushing basics. Anyway here is the explanation for this tuff nut(guess everyone got this wrong):
School children who are punished by their teachers for not paying attention are, nevertheless, caught again and again for inattention. On the other hand, children punished for cheating during tests usually do not repeat the punished behavior. It appears that while punishment is ineffective in changing the behavior of inattentive children, it does convince cheaters that their behavior was wrong and that they should not cheat anymore.
This conclusion would be weakened the most by which of the following?
A) Known cheaters are usually reseated in the back of the class by themselves.
B) Studies indicate that cheaters are seldom punished by their teachers.
C) The proportion of inattentive students punished for their inattentiveness is larger than the proportion of cheaters punished for their cheating.
D) Cheaters whose punishment is reduced go back to cheating somewhat more than cheaters who undergo their entire punishment.
E) Cheaters are not usually inattentive, and inattentive students seldom cheat.
(A) If this alternative were true, the argument for the effectiveness of punishment would be seriously weakened, as the cheaters may only modify their behavior because the opportunity for copying is greatly reduced. This is the correct choice. B) This argument is irrelevant to the conclusion that punishment is effective. The question is not how often the children are punished, but how effective is the punishment when administered. C) Again, the argument is irrelevant to the conclusion, which addresses the effectiveness, not the prevalence of punishment. D) This seems to be plausible alternative, but it sidesteps the issue and addresses the amount of the punishment rather than the relative effectiveness. It does not weaken the conclusion. E) This is not directly relevant to the conclusion.
Historian: Newton developed mathematical concepts and techniques that are fundamental to modern calculus. Leibniz developed closely analogous concepts and techniques. It has traditionally been thought that these discoveries were independent. Researchers have, however, recently discovered notes of Leibniz that discuss one of Newtons books on mathematics. Several scholars have argued that since the book includes a presentation of Newtons calculus concepts and techniques, and since the notes were written before Leibniz own development of calculus concepts and techniques, it is virtually certain that the traditional view is false. A more cautious conclusion than this is called for, however. Leibniz notes are limited to early sections of Newtons book, sections that precede the ones in which Newtons calculus concepts and techniques are presented.
In the historians reasoning, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?
A. The first provides evidence in support of the overall position that the historian defends; the second is evidence that has been used to support an opposing position.
B. The first provides evidence in support of the overall position that the historian defends; the second is that position.
C. The first provides evidence in support of an intermediate conclusion that is drawn to provide support for the overall position that the historian defends; the second provides evidence against that intermediate conclusion.
D. The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion that the historian criticizes; the second is evidence offered in support of the historians own position.
E. The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion that the historian criticizes; the second is further information that substantiates that evidence.
Historian: Newton developed mathematical concepts and techniques that are fundamental to modern calculus. Leibniz developed closely analogous concepts and techniques. It has traditionally been thought that these discoveries were independent. Researchers have, however, recently discovered notes of Leibniz that discuss one of Newtons books on mathematics. Several scholars have argued that since the book includes a presentation of Newtons calculus concepts and techniques, and since the notes were written before Leibniz own development of calculus concepts and techniques, it is virtually certain that the traditional view is false. A more cautious conclusion than this is called for, however. Leibniz notes are limited to early sections of Newtons book, sections that precede the ones in which Newtons calculus concepts and techniques are presented.
In the historians reasoning, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?
A. The first provides evidence in support of the overall position that the historian defends; the second is evidence that has been used to support an opposing position.
B. The first provides evidence in support of the overall position that the historian defends; the second is that position.
C. The first provides evidence in support of an intermediate conclusion that is drawn to provide support for the overall position that the historian defends; the second provides evidence against that intermediate conclusion.
D. The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion that the historian criticizes; the second is evidence offered in support of the historians own position.
E. The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion that the historian criticizes; the second is further information that substantiates that evidence.
according to me
OA is E ...
IMO D
Whats the OA. plz let me know if you want me to explain.
Historian: Newton developed mathematical concepts and techniques that are fundamental to modern calculus. Leibniz developed closely analogous concepts and techniques. It has traditionally been thought that these discoveries were independent. Researchers have, however, recently discovered notes of Leibniz that discuss one of Newtons books on mathematics. Several scholars have argued that since the book includes a presentation of Newtons calculus concepts and techniques, and since the notes were written before Leibniz own development of calculus concepts and techniques, it is virtually certain that the traditional view is false. A more cautious conclusion than this is called for, however. Leibniz notes are limited to early sections of Newtons book, sections that precede the ones in which Newtons calculus concepts and techniques are presented.
In the historians reasoning, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?
A. The first provides evidence in support of the overall position that the historian defends; the second is evidence that has been used to support an opposing position.
B. The first provides evidence in support of the overall position that the historian defends; the second is that position.
C. The first provides evidence in support of an intermediate conclusion that is drawn to provide support for the overall position that the historian defends; the second provides evidence against that intermediate conclusion.
D. The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion that the historian criticizes; the second is evidence offered in support of the historians own position.
E. The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion that the historian criticizes; the second is further information that substantiates that evidence.
OA is D! Could you explain ?