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

Redeem

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.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
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
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start 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

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Govt. Regulation and American Business

Expert replies
by galaxian » Mon Jun 20, 2011 10:19 am
Critics insist that government regulation of business
has made it more difficult for American businesses to
operate profitably and has destroyed their ability to
compete with foreign producers of consumer goods.
This argument is not compelling. Government regulation
of business was never as active in this nation as
it was between the years 1975 and 1985, and in
those years the average net worth of American
families increased more than it had in any previous
decade.
The author's argument would be most seriously
weakened if it were true that

1. Eighty percent of all businesses started during
the decade 1975-1985 lost money in their
first year of operation.

2. More businesses declared bankruptcy during
the period 1975-1985 than in any previous
decade.

3. During the decade 1975-1985, America
imported more consumer goods than it
exported.

4. The increase in net worth of average American
families during the years 1975-1985 was
largely due to an increase in the value of
residential homes.

5. The average interest rate charged on business
and home mortgage loans was higher during
the decade 1975-1985 than it had been in
any previous decade.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by Frankenstein » Mon Jun 20, 2011 10:36 am
Hi,
D gives an alternate cause for increase in net worth. So, it weakens
Hence, D
Cheers!

Things are not what they appear to be... nor are they otherwise
Join the discussion

by Ozlemg » Mon Jun 20, 2011 11:13 am
my answer is D

Author's argument is business was active btw years 1975-1985 and average net worth increased during those periods!

Answer D seriously weakens his argument above. increase in the averag enet worth was due to increase in the value of
residential homes
The more you suffer before the test, the less you will do so in the test! :)
Join the discussion

by Tani » Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:46 pm
This is a difficult question because the author is basing an argument relative to competition and business profitability on consumer net worth. While these are related, the author does not make that case clearly. Nevertheless, since it is his only real evidence, we have to deal with it. By showing that his support (ncreased net worth) was caused by something unrelated to regulation (housing values), we take away his evidence and his argument fails.
Tani Wolff
Join the discussion

by sunnyjohn » Tue Jun 21, 2011 9:47 pm
The Author in this twisting the Critics argument while presenting his/her views.

Critics are focusing on : How gov. regulation has decreased the profitability of American biz ?
Author: How gov. regulation has increased the "net worth" of American families ?

Author here making a direct assumption between "net worth of American families is a direct measure of profitability of American biz". or "more profitable the biz, more is the net worth of families"


Option D shows an alternative way of how the net worth might have increased.
Join the discussion

by Sanjay2706 » Tue Jun 21, 2011 9:55 pm
Option D weakens the argument here, as the increase in the value of homes has accounted for the increase in net worth of average american families.
Hope this helps.
Join the discussion