a poll has revealed that 95% of the residents of essex county believe that the way to reduce violent crime is to build larger maximum-security prisons. when a referendum for the construction of a maximum-security prison in essex country was added to the ballot the following november, however, the proposal was voted down by a three-to-one margin.
which of the following, if true, forms the best basis for at least a partial explanation of the apparent discrepancy described above?
1. the threat of a life sentence in a maximum-security prison has been shown to be an adequate deterrent of violent crime.
2. the prison would have been constructed by a private company, and it would have been impossible for the county government to oversee the company's finances.
3. fewer than half of the registered voters in essex county voted.
4. much of the substantial cost of the prison could have been offset by increasing the tolls required to cross the bridge over nearby lake essex.
5. maximum-security prisons are a boon to the overall well-being of the state, but they also pose a considerable risk in the areas in which they are located.
[spoiler]OA : E, i feel D is also a strong contender (is it "could" in statement that makes is less preferable than E [/spoiler]
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
Essex County
This topic has expert replies
-
vikram4689
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1325
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
- Thanked: 105 times
- Followed by:14 members
IMO E
In such questions new areas are not to be added ,hence a,b,c,d get ruled out.
1. the threat of a life sentence in a maximum-security prison has been shown to be an adequate deterrent of violent crime.
2. the prison would have been constructed by a private company, and it would have been impossible for the county government to oversee the company's finances.
3. fewer than half of the registered voters in essex county voted.een in this case we would not get -3-1 reults
4. much of the substantial cost of the prison could have been offset by increasing the tolls required to cross the bridge over nearby lake essex.
5. maximum-security prisons are a boon to the overall well-being of the state, but they also pose a considerable risk in the areas in which they are located.
In such questions new areas are not to be added ,hence a,b,c,d get ruled out.
1. the threat of a life sentence in a maximum-security prison has been shown to be an adequate deterrent of violent crime.
2. the prison would have been constructed by a private company, and it would have been impossible for the county government to oversee the company's finances.
3. fewer than half of the registered voters in essex county voted.een in this case we would not get -3-1 reults
4. much of the substantial cost of the prison could have been offset by increasing the tolls required to cross the bridge over nearby lake essex.
5. maximum-security prisons are a boon to the overall well-being of the state, but they also pose a considerable risk in the areas in which they are located.
-
vikram4689
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1325
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
- Thanked: 105 times
- Followed by:14 members
this is a RESOLVE THE PARADOX question and CR Bible says that NEW INFO can to added to such question....please provide some other explanation
why i feels D is better is coz risks that E talks about would have been known to people even earlier but when govt said that it will increase tax o construct the prison people opposed it
why i feels D is better is coz risks that E talks about would have been known to people even earlier but when govt said that it will increase tax o construct the prison people opposed it
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
when you get these problems, you need to look at the "big picture" of the argument -- basically, using normal real-world commonsense intuition (i.e., *NOT* reading the passage in a "classroom" sort of way) -- and figure out what needs to be explained in the first place.
i.e., WHAT is
- weird,
- unusual,
- counter to some normal pattern,
- counter to what would be predicted,
etc?
once you figure this out -- provided you specify exactly what needs explanation -- you should find that 4 of the answer choices have basically nothing to do with the issue that you've identified, and that the other 1 answer choice is strongly dispositive.
--
here's the big picture of this argument:
* the vast majority of people in the country think that prisons are good.
* however, they voted against building the prison in their own county.
so, we need something that explains this difference -- i.e., we need something that would explain why these voters would disapprove of a prison in their own county, even though they think that a new prison would generally be a good thing.
once you recognize this difference, you'll find that only #5 helps to explain it -- if a prison poses a risk that is localized in its own neighborhood, then this risk explains why the voters wouldn't want the prison in their own backyard.
i.e., WHAT is
- weird,
- unusual,
- counter to some normal pattern,
- counter to what would be predicted,
etc?
once you figure this out -- provided you specify exactly what needs explanation -- you should find that 4 of the answer choices have basically nothing to do with the issue that you've identified, and that the other 1 answer choice is strongly dispositive.
--
here's the big picture of this argument:
* the vast majority of people in the country think that prisons are good.
* however, they voted against building the prison in their own county.
so, we need something that explains this difference -- i.e., we need something that would explain why these voters would disapprove of a prison in their own county, even though they think that a new prison would generally be a good thing.
once you recognize this difference, you'll find that only #5 helps to explain it -- if a prison poses a risk that is localized in its own neighborhood, then this risk explains why the voters wouldn't want the prison in their own backyard.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
-
mundasingh123
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 2330
- Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
- Thanked: 56 times
- Followed by:26 members
How about C ?
If only 5% of the essex county population are registered voters and the 5 % population belongs to that segment which does not want the high security population then doesnt this explain the discrepancy
If only 5% of the essex county population are registered voters and the 5 % population belongs to that segment which does not want the high security population then doesnt this explain the discrepancy
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
this is an extreme, extraordinarily unlikely interpretation of choice (c), which must therefore be rejected from consideration.mundasingh123 wrote:How about C ?
If only 5% of the essex county population are registered voters and the 5 % population belongs to that segment which does not want the high security population then doesnt this explain the discrepancy
remember -- with these q's, as well as with strengthen/weaken q's -- you need to interpret the statements in the most likely, most commonsense way.
you cannot postulate extremely unlikely, outlying cases, and then proceed to build an argument on those cases!
--
You: I'm going to be home late tonight.
Wife: Oh my god! You're not coming home until tomorrow morning? Because you're cheating on me with your secretary? You ... !!!!
you see where i'm going with this.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
-
mundasingh123
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 2330
- Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
- Thanked: 56 times
- Followed by:26 members
LOLlunarpower wrote:this is an extreme, extraordinarily unlikely interpretation of choice (c), which must therefore be rejected from consideration.mundasingh123 wrote:How about C ?
If only 5% of the essex county population are registered voters and the 5 % population belongs to that segment which does not want the high security population then doesnt this explain the discrepancy
remember -- with these q's, as well as with strengthen/weaken q's -- you need to interpret the statements in the most likely, most commonsense way.
you cannot postulate extremely unlikely, outlying cases, and then proceed to build an argument on those cases!
--
You: I'm going to be home late tonight.
Wife: Oh my god! You're not coming home until tomorrow morning? Because you're cheating on me with your secretary? You ... !!!!
you see where i'm going with this.
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
-
vikram4689
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1325
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
- Thanked: 105 times
- Followed by:14 members
HI Ron,
I was applying the same method that you explained but in the end both D and E seems viable. E is for the reason you explained. The reason i feel D is contender is that people may feel that prison is necessary but when they come to know that cost of making the prison would be taken from them by increasing toll taxes then many people would vote against the prison.
I was applying the same method that you explained but in the end both D and E seems viable. E is for the reason you explained. The reason i feel D is contender is that people may feel that prison is necessary but when they come to know that cost of making the prison would be taken from them by increasing toll taxes then many people would vote against the prison.
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
choice d says "could have been offset"; this wording implies that these toll increases were not on the ballot.vikram4689 wrote:HI Ron,
I was applying the same method that you explained but in the end both D and E seems viable. E is for the reason you explained. The reason i feel D is contender is that people may feel that prison is necessary but when they come to know that cost of making the prison would be taken from them by increasing toll taxes then many people would vote against the prison.
so, this is just a hypothetical workaround that was not actually implemented -- as such, it is irrelevant.
(cf. "i could have gone to the concert", which implies that i didn't actually go to the concert.)
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
-
vikram4689
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1325
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
- Thanked: 105 times
- Followed by:14 members
Thanks Ron. added that meaning of "could" to my error log
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
ok. just make sure that you distinguish between "could have VERBed" (= hypothetical alternate possibility that didn't actually happen) and "could VERB".vikram4689 wrote:Thanks Ron. added that meaning of "could" to my error log
the former, since it didn't actually happen, can't reasonably affect one of these situations from a forward-looking standpoint; the latter, however, could, if the hypothetical were probable enough to be considered in a "most likely" or "commonsense" scenario.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
-
vikram4689
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1325
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
- Thanked: 105 times
- Followed by:14 members
Hi Ron,
I was revising my error log and came across this point. I tried to find example to make it more comprehensive but stuck at one point, following were the example that i tried
I could have gone to see her last Sunday - "could have VERBed" i.e. i did not go
I could go to see her her last Sunday - "could verb" i.e. this shows probability
How to construct a sentence in "could verb" which is not probable enough to be considered in "commonsense scenario"
I was revising my error log and came across this point. I tried to find example to make it more comprehensive but stuck at one point, following were the example that i tried
I could have gone to see her last Sunday - "could have VERBed" i.e. i did not go
I could go to see her her last Sunday - "could verb" i.e. this shows probability
How to construct a sentence in "could verb" which is not probable enough to be considered in "commonsense scenario"
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
you can't write "this could happen", with the intention of showing some sort of probable event, in a past timeframe!vikram4689 wrote:Hi Ron,
I was revising my error log and came across this point. I tried to find example to make it more comprehensive but stuck at one point, following were the example that i tried
I could have gone to see her last Sunday - "could have VERBed" i.e. i did not go
I could go to see her her last Sunday - "could verb" i.e. this shows probability
if you're talking about *last* sunday, then there is no such thing as "showing probability" anymore; either you went to see her or you didn't.
not really sure what you're asking here -- are you asking for rules that can substitute for common sense? if so, then there are no such rules that could be reasonably articulated.How to construct a sentence in "could verb" which is not probable enough to be considered in "commonsense scenario"
please give me a little more help here, in terms of exactly what you're asking ... thanks.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
-
vikram4689
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1325
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
- Thanked: 105 times
- Followed by:14 members
In your post you explained about "could have VERBed" these show hypothetical/possibility and they DID NOT happen
Actually i was trying to construct sentences with "could verb" for which you mentioned "if the hypothetical were probable enough to be considered in a "most likely" or "commonsense" scenario."
Can you please explain what was meant by the underlined portion above
Actually i was trying to construct sentences with "could verb" for which you mentioned "if the hypothetical were probable enough to be considered in a "most likely" or "commonsense" scenario."
Can you please explain what was meant by the underlined portion above
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
the commonsense part is independent of sentence structure; it's just an intuitive evaluation of how likely something is.vikram4689 wrote:In your post you explained about "could have VERBed" these show hypothetical/possibility and they DID NOT happen
Actually i was trying to construct sentences with "could verb" for which you mentioned "if the hypothetical were probable enough to be considered in a "most likely" or "commonsense" scenario."
Can you please explain what was meant by the underlined portion above
for instance, let's say the passage deals with "should i avoid walking in the street outside my home this afternoon?"
a flash flood, of the sort that happens every 200 years, could flood the street and wash me away --> way too improbable to be worth considering.
construction crews are working in the street, releasing clouds of dust that could aggravate my asthma --> this is reasonable and is worth considering.
basically, you just use "real-world" thinking, unless you are working on a specific problem type that eschews such thinking (e.g., "draw the conclusion" CR problems).
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
