Beat The GMAT a GMAT & MBA community

My Choice D. What is OA?

_________________
If I am wrong correct me , If my post helped let me know by clicking the Thanks button .

Chitra Sivasankar Arunagiri

Option D

_________________
I am not an Expert, please feel free to suggest if there is an error.

It was a close call between options D and E and frankly i was in a fix to choose one of them. But i think i made an educated guess i.e option E just has a bit of an advantage over option D. So my answer is option E. well options D and E are very close indeed.

Has to Be between D and E
E differs from the stimulus in a very subtle way .

_________________
I Seek Explanations Not Answers

It is D plain and simple because in stimulus- we are assuming that the world leaders would be un-willing to co-operate thus we have to be optimistic for inflation rate stability

similarly in D we are assuming that high cost overruns are not favorable hence the conclusion that vehicle safety is jeopardized.

_________________
Cheers !!

Quant 47-Striving for 50
Verbal 34-Striving for 40

My gmat journey :
http://www.beatthegmat.com/710-bblast-signing-off-thank-you-all-t90735.html
My take on the GMAT RC :
http://www.beatthegmat.com/ways-to-bblast-the-gmat-rc-t90808.html

+1 for D

Can any of the experts help us in this question....

Think about what actions impact what - the cause and effect.

The statement is structured: "In order for x to happen, y is necessary. However, in order for y, z is necessary. Implying that z is not likely, x won't happen". The closest that comes to this is D, although I'm not crazy about how much more strongly worded the conclusion is (statement says not optimistic, while D says the outcome is unavoidable).

E looks appealing at first, but it differs in that reporting or not reporting company performance (y) doesn't impact whether or not honesty is the best policy (x). There's no cause and effect. Because of this, the conclusion doesn't refer back to x like the original statement does, but to y. A and B are similar in that y doesn't really cause x.

C is flips things around, but is initially similar. "y is necessary for x to happen. In order for y, z is necessary." So far so good - even though the order of the first condition got flipped around, the structure is essentially the same. However, the next part "Therefore, x is only possible if z" doesn't imply that z is not likely.