Commissioner: Budget forecasters project a revenue shortfall of a billion dollars in the coming fiscal year. Since there is no feasible way to increase the available funds, our only choice is to decrease expenditures. The plan before you outlines feasible cuts that would yield savings of a billion dollars over the coming fiscal year. We will be able to solve the problem we face, therefore, only if we adopt this plan.
This reasoning in the commissioner's argument is flawed because this argument
(A) relies on information that is far from certain
(B) confuses being an adequate solution with being a required solution
(C) inappropriately relies on the opinions of experts
(D) inappropriately employs language that is vague
(E) takes for granted that there is no way to increase available funds
CR - Budget Forecasters
This topic has expert replies
- 6983manish
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 12:27 am
- Thanked: 6 times
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 132
- Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 2:49 am
- Thanked: 5 times
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 857
- Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 1:36 am
- Thanked: 56 times
- Followed by:15 members
I had a battle going on with options B and E , which one to choose . Then got theclue from the word "only" in the argument .
Budget forecasters project a revenue shortfall of a billion dollars in the coming fiscal year. Since there is no feasible way to increase the available funds, our only choice is to decrease expenditures.
(B) confuses being an adequate solution with being a required solution
(E) takes for granted that there is no way to increase available funds
If E would have been takes for granted that there is no OTHER way to increase available funds , then certainly i would have choosen E , but in this case it acts as saviour .
IMO B.
Budget forecasters project a revenue shortfall of a billion dollars in the coming fiscal year. Since there is no feasible way to increase the available funds, our only choice is to decrease expenditures.
(B) confuses being an adequate solution with being a required solution
(E) takes for granted that there is no way to increase available funds
If E would have been takes for granted that there is no OTHER way to increase available funds , then certainly i would have choosen E , but in this case it acts as saviour .
IMO B.
Thanks & Regards,
AIM GMAT
AIM GMAT
- tpr-becky
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 509
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 1:08 pm
- Location: Irvine, CA
- Thanked: 199 times
- Followed by:85 members
- GMAT Score:750
The onlys are key here - the Only way to solve the problme is to adopt THIS plan. yes, the argument says we have to cut spending but is this plan the ONLY plan out there? Therefore B is correct. The current plan will cut spending which is adequate but there is nothing which says that this is the only plan that will do that so this plan is not required or necessary, only one option.
therefore the correct answer is B.
E talks about increasing funds but in the article is says there is no way to increase funds and we have to take the article as truth.
therefore the correct answer is B.
E talks about increasing funds but in the article is says there is no way to increase funds and we have to take the article as truth.
Becky
Master GMAT Instructor
The Princeton Review
Irvine, CA
Master GMAT Instructor
The Princeton Review
Irvine, CA
- Target2009
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 574
- Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 1:47 pm
- Location: USA
- Thanked: 29 times
- Followed by:5 members