im gonna say A because it presents the most direct cyclical explantion

money9111 wrote:im gonna say A because it presents the most direct cyclical explantion

did u time this?

i did not time that one... it may have been just shy of two minutes... wasn't under 1:30 though

I think it should be C.

vscid wrote:The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by predictions of slow economic growth in the coming year. However, those predictions would not have affected the employment rate if it had not been for the lack of capital reserves of major industries. So if major industries increase their capital reserves, the employment rate will not decline in the future.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the validity of the argument above?


1]Major industry foresaw the drop in employment.

2]Some major industries had appreciable capital reserves.

3]An increase in labor costs could adversely affect the employment rate.

4]The government could pass legislation mandating that major industries set aside a fixed amount as capital reserves every year.

5]The drop in the employment rate was more severe this year than last.

Conclusion is "if major industries increase their capital reserves, the employment rate will not decline in the future."

Premise "However, those predictions would not have affected the employment rate if it had not been for the lack of capital reserves of major industries."

choice C does attacks the premise

IMO C

IMO it's C. Please post the OA.

IMO B..

Premise: Employment rates has decreased bcoz there were predictions about the lack of capital with major industries.
Conclusion: So if capital is increased then there will be less unemployment..

B says that there was enough capital with the industry in past. which seriously affects the validity of premise as well as the argument.

OA pl................

received a pm.

The conclusion is the last sentence of the passage. Note the ambitiousness/extremity of the conclusion. The author argues that if major industries increase their capital reserves, the employment rate WILL NOT decline.

To weaken, we just need to find a choice that tells us there are other ways to decrease the employment rate.

Only now, with this predition in mind, do we approach the answer choices, hunting for one that matches our prediction. Remember, we don't care about wrong answers and why they are wrong. Also, we should recognize that often it is harder to reason why a tempting wrong answer is wrong than it is to see why the right answer is right. So, if we overuse POE, it will hurt our score.

That's why Kaplan's method is predict and match.

Which choice matches our prediction above? That is, which choice tells us that there are other ways of hurting employment rate?...clearly choice C.

Choose C.

C it is

Testluv wrote:received a pm.

The conclusion is the last sentence of the passage. Note the ambitiousness/extremity of the conclusion. The author argues that if major industries increase their capital reserves, the employment rate WILL NOT decline.

To weaken, we just need to find a choice that tells us there are other ways to decrease the employment rate.

Only now, with this predition in mind, do we approach the answer choices, hunting for one that matches our prediction. Remember, we don't care about wrong answers and why they are wrong. Also, we should recognize that often it is harder to reason why a tempting wrong answer is wrong than it is to see why the right answer is right. So, if we overuse POE, it will hurt our score.

That's why Kaplan's method is predict and match.

Which choice matches our prediction above? That is, which choice tells us that there are other ways of hurting employment rate?...clearly choice C.

Choose C.

can B be hold? It shows evidence that though the 'cause' wasn't there, the 'effect' happened

Testluv wrote:received a pm.

The conclusion is the last sentence of the passage. Note the ambitiousness/extremity of the conclusion. The author argues that if major industries increase their capital reserves, the employment rate WILL NOT decline.

To weaken, we just need to find a choice that tells us there are other ways to decrease the employment rate.

Only now, with this predition in mind, do we approach the answer choices, hunting for one that matches our prediction. Remember, we don't care about wrong answers and why they are wrong. Also, we should recognize that often it is harder to reason why a tempting wrong answer is wrong than it is to see why the right answer is right. So, if we overuse POE, it will hurt our score.

That's why Kaplan's method is predict and match.

Which choice matches our prediction above? That is, which choice tells us that there are other ways of hurting employment rate?...clearly choice C.

Choose C.

I would like to invite expert comment on this thought process:

Fact: There is a decline in the employment rate.

And the decline rate is being spurred by prediction of slow economic growth.

Argument-1: Again, the lack of capital reserves of major industries adding to the problem of decline in employment rate.

Argument-2 or Conclusion: if major industries increase their capital reserves, the employment rate will not decline in the future.

If we consider argument -1, then option B seems right choice. (there is sufficient reserve with major industries but still there is no decline in employment rate)

But, If we consider argument -2, then option C seems right (As Testluv argued)

i would say the problem with B is that it starts the answer of with "SOME of major industries". for the gmat, some does not equal all; some does not equal most either. if some of the industries follow answer B, that doesn't give us enough information to say the effect WILL NOT decline the unemployment rate.

my concern though is answer A. Perhaps it is the error in the writing of the answer choice. Is it suppose to be " A major industry foresaw" or is it "major INDUSTRIES foresaw..." i don't think it can be as written right? doesn't make any sense. maybe that's the basis i should have originally denied it on.

however, i see how (C) weakens the argument, and since only one answer will weaken the question, that is the strongest answer. and new information is allowed in the answer choices to help weaken a question stem.

still wondering if answer A is properly worded though?

brijesh wrote:

Testluv wrote:received a pm.

The conclusion is the last sentence of the passage. Note the ambitiousness/extremity of the conclusion. The author argues that if major industries increase their capital reserves, the employment rate WILL NOT decline.

To weaken, we just need to find a choice that tells us there are other ways to decrease the employment rate.

Only now, with this predition in mind, do we approach the answer choices, hunting for one that matches our prediction. Remember, we don't care about wrong answers and why they are wrong. Also, we should recognize that often it is harder to reason why a tempting wrong answer is wrong than it is to see why the right answer is right. So, if we overuse POE, it will hurt our score.

That's why Kaplan's method is predict and match.

Which choice matches our prediction above? That is, which choice tells us that there are other ways of hurting employment rate?...clearly choice C.

Choose C.

I would like to invite expert comment on this thought process:

Fact: There is a decline in the employment rate.

And the decline rate is being spurred by prediction of slow economic growth.

Argument-1: Again, the lack of capital reserves of major industries adding to the problem of decline in employment rate.

Argument-2 or Conclusion: if major industries increase their capital reserves, the employment rate will not decline in the future.

If we consider argument -1, then option B seems right choice. (there is sufficient reserve with major industries but still there is no decline in employment rate)

But, If we consider argument -2, then option C seems right (As Testluv argued)