BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

CR challenge - 8

Expert replies
by abhasjha » Wed Aug 26, 2009 10:03 pm
The town of Greenfield recently instituted a substantial supplementary tax on all
households, whereby each household is taxed in proportion to the volume of the
trash that it puts out for trash collectors to pick up, as measured by the number of
standard-sized garbage bags put out. In order to reduce the volume of the trash on
which their tax bill is based, Greenfield households can deliver their recyclable
trash to a conveniently located local commercial recycling center, where such
trash is accepted free of charge.
The supplementary tax provides some financial incentive to Greenfield
households to do each of the following EXCEPT
(A) sort out recyclable trash thoroughly from their other trash
(B) dump nonrecyclable trash illegally at parks and roadsides
(C) compress and nest items of nonrecyclable trash before putting them out for
pickup
(D) deliver recyclable materials to the recycling center instead of passing them on to neighbors who want to reuse them
(E) buy products without packaging or with recyclable rather than nonrecyclable
packaging
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by bustgmat » Wed Aug 26, 2009 10:40 pm
D IMO
Join the discussion

by pandeyvineet24 » Thu Aug 27, 2009 4:05 am
D should be

(A) sort out recyclable trash thoroughly from their other trash
- Saves money for Greenfield households because of reduced volume

(B) dump nonrecyclable trash illegally at parks and roadsides
- Again saves money for Greenfield households because of reduced volume dumped in trash bins.

(C) compress and nest items of nonrecyclable trash before putting them out for pickup
- compressing would reduce Volume of nonrecyclable trash abd Saves money

(D) deliver recyclable materials to the recycling center instead of passing them on to neighbors who want to reuse them
- Correct

(E) buy products without packaging or with recyclable rather than nonrecyclable packaging
- nonrecyclable packaging would reduce in comparatively low volume of nonrecyclable trash.
Join the discussion

by ranell » Thu Aug 27, 2009 11:59 am
D for me as well
Join the discussion

by siddharth rastogi » Thu Aug 27, 2009 1:09 pm
IMO D

OA?
Join the discussion

by arorag » Thu Aug 27, 2009 6:19 pm
will go with B as it contradict the purpose of the program
Join the discussion

by abhasjha » Thu Aug 27, 2009 11:16 pm
OA- D

official explanation follows :

When Greenfield households deliver recyclable trash to commercial recycling centers, that

trash is accepted

for free. That means that homeowners don't lose money, as they would if
they put out the trash for collectors to add to their trash tax, but it also means they don't

gain

any money by bringing the trash to the centers. They would do just as well financially
giving their recyclable trash to their neighbors; in both cases, they avoid the tax. So there's

no financial incentive for the action described in (D).

(A) Since households pay a tax for putting out nonrecyclable trash, and can dispose of

their recyclable trash for free, there

is a financial incentive to make sure they find all their
recyclable trash.

(B) provides a method for avoiding the tax levied on trash put out for collection, so there's

a definite financial incentive to follow this course.

(C) The trash tax is calculated based on the volume of trash put out. (C) would reduce the

volume of the trash put out and therefore would reduce the tax paid.

(E) Since nonrecyclable packaging goes into the trash, using products without packaging,

or with packaging that could be brought to recycling centers, would reduce the volume of

trash put out and so would reduce the trash tax paid.
Join the discussion

by joseph32 » Sun May 15, 2016 9:33 pm
I like the explanation on D
Join the discussion