Live GMAT classes with Target Test Prep start Nov 21 and Nov 22. First class free.

See classes
Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026 winner: Target Test Prep, #1 Test Prep

Target Test Prep was voted #1 Best Test Prep in the 2026 Newsweek Readers’ Choice™ Awards.

★★★★★5.0563 reviews
GMATLiveTeachStarts Nov 22
Josh Braslow, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Josh Braslow, 20+ years in test prep

Nov 22 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Attend the first class for free
  • Every class is recorded, so you never fall behind
View classes & enroll
Limited seats availableTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeachOnDemandStart anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

with

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
Schedule
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll Start free 5-day trial
Limited cohort · enrollment openTrial includes full course accessTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemandStart anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Clear-cutting tropical rainforests

Expert replies
by rjdunn03 » Sun May 22, 2011 2:31 pm
Clear-cutting a tropical rainforest exposes its shallow soil to heavy tropical rain. The soil is quickly washed away, causing floods and landslides, and preventing regeneration of the original rainforest. However, fast-growing softwoods, which can be harvested for a profit, will grow in clear-cut areas, halting further soil runoff. If we can't prevent clear-cutting, we should provide tax relief to companies that plant softwood plantations in clearcut areas in order to minimize environmental degradation.

Which of the following if true, most seriously calls into question the advisability of the above scheme?

A) Softwood plantations usually contain only type of tree, and so lack the biodiversity of the original rainforest.
B) Increasing the value of clear-cut land will encourage the clear-cutting of more rain-forest.
C) It would be cheaper to halt flooding and landslides by building dams and levees.
D) The original rainforests are clear-cut to obtain hardwoods, which are many times more valuable than softwoods.
E) Government incentives tend to have far reaching consequences that are difficult to predict and may turn out to be counterproductive.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by newton9 » Sun May 22, 2011 4:20 pm
P: Clear-cutting exposes shallow soil, causing floods and landslides ,and preventing regeneration of the original forest. Recommends fast-growing softwoods.

C: If clear-cutting can't be prevented, provide tax-relief to companies that plant softwood plantations.

We have to undermine the conclusion that planting softwood plantations minimizes environmental degradation.

A) Not concerned about the bio-diversity of the rain forest.

B) Providing incentives (encouraging) clear cutting will lead to more clear-cutting, thus undermining conclusion that by providing tax relief environmental degradation can be reduced.

C) Cost of halting flooding is not relevant to the argument at hand.

D) We have to undermine the fact that growing softwoods is not going to minimize environmental degradation, but we are not concerned about the value of softwood vs. hardwood.

E) Not relevant and going too far from the scope of the argument.
Join the discussion

by rjdunn03 » Sun May 22, 2011 6:13 pm
Yeah you are right. The answer was B

So how did you know that this would increase the land value? I guess that is what confused me about the answers, I originally thought that answer was out of scope because it didn't seem like the stem mentioned land value. Thanks for your input.
Join the discussion

by sandy217 » Sun May 22, 2011 11:51 pm
newton9 wrote:P: Clear-cutting exposes shallow soil, causing floods and landslides ,and preventing regeneration of the original forest. Recommends fast-growing softwoods.

C: If clear-cutting can't be prevented, provide tax-relief to companies that plant softwood plantations.

We have to undermine the conclusion that planting softwood plantations minimizes environmental degradation.

A) Not concerned about the bio-diversity of the rain forest.

B) Providing incentives (encouraging) clear cutting will lead to more clear-cutting, thus undermining conclusion that by providing tax relief environmental degradation can be reduced.

C) Cost of halting flooding is not relevant to the argument at hand.

D) We have to undermine the fact that growing softwoods is not going to minimize environmental degradation, but we are not concerned about the value of softwood vs. hardwood.

E) Not relevant and going too far from the scope of the argument.
I am not able to understand how can B say we are encouraging clear cutting? Does argument talk about increasing value of clear cut land?
Join the discussion