Critical Reasoning

uwhusky wrote:

selango wrote: For 10 years there is uninterrupted prosperity.But after 6 yrs itself there is a recession.This weakens the argument.

D) During 1939, the U.S. economy contracted sharply, unemployment jumped 5%, and America's optimism fell.

Contracted economy, higher unemployment rate, and lower optimism is NOT a recession. It could simply be interpret as "less rosy", but a far cry to call it anything but a minor hiccup, if at all.

selango wrote: In the argument it is stated that "New Deal singlehandedly propelled the United States out of the Great Depression and into decades of uninterrupted prosperity"

World war does not propelled the country out of depression.But it strengthen the economy.

B) The considerable government expenditures and massive labor requirements engendered by America's entry into World War II in late 1941 helped employ Americans and grow GDP.

There's nothing that says WWII propelled the country out of depression, but you're right, the war did strengthen the economy, thus weakens the argument that New Deal singlehandedly put US into decades of uninterrupted prosperity. In fact, anything that could offer as alternative to say that New Deal was not the sole reason is enough to weaken the argument.

neha.patni wrote:The New Deal in America began in 1933 and included widespread bank reforms, unprecedented government infrastructure spending, and unparalleled expansion in the size of government. Some political commentators and economic historians contend that President Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal singlehandedly propelled the United States out of the Great Depression and into decades of uninterrupted prosperity. To support this claim, these economists note that during the years following 1933, GDP grew, unemployment shrunk, and optimism increased.

Which of the following statements, if true, would most weaken the above argument?

B) The considerable government expenditures and massive labor requirements engendered by America's entry into World War II in late 1941 helped employ Americans and grow GDP.
D) During 1939, the U.S. economy contracted sharply, unemployment jumped 5%, and America's optimism fell.

selango wrote: The argument states that the purpose of New deal is "singlehandedly propelled the United States out of the Great Depression".

WWII only strengthen the economy not propelled the country out of depression.This can't the alternative reason.

First New deal propelled the country out of depression and economy grows.Then later WWII provides additional support and strengthen the already grown economy.

What you say?

reply2spg wrote:Here is the link why I changed my answer from B to D

https://www.platinumgmat.com/practice_gm ... ion_id=607

Not sure who is the owner of this site. May be some expert can help us here

paes wrote:

reply2spg wrote:Here is the link why I changed my answer from B to D

https://www.platinumgmat.com/practice_gm ... ion_id=607

Not sure who is the owner of this site. May be some expert can help us here

I am not convinced with the given explanation.
This does not look a good source for GMAT.

neha.patni wrote:The New Deal in America began in 1933 and included widespread bank reforms, unprecedented government infrastructure spending, and unparalleled expansion in the size of government. Some political commentators and economic historians contend that President Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal singlehandedly propelled the United States out of the Great Depression and into decades of uninterrupted prosperity. To support this claim, these economists note that during the years following 1933, GDP grew, unemployment shrunk, and optimism increased.

Which of the following statements, if true, would most weaken the above argument?

A) The considerable debt burden that the government assumed to fund the New Deal sparked fear in the minds of some economists, investors, and businessmen.
B) The considerable government expenditures and massive labor requirements engendered by America's entry into World War II in late 1941 helped employ Americans and grow GDP.
C) On average, GDP per capita fell and unemployment rose in many foreign countries during the years after President Roosevelt announced his New Deal.
D) During 1939, the U.S. economy contracted sharply, unemployment jumped 5%, and America's optimism fell.
E) U.S. GDP during the mid 1930s stood at levels much lower than 30 years later.

To support this claim, these economists note that during the years following 1933, GDP grew, unemployment shrunk, and optimism increased.

paes wrote:Stuart,

I don't understand how B is irrelevant.

-> Some <X> contend that New Deal singlehandedly propelled the United States out of the Great Depression and into decades of uninterrupted prosperity.

means that -> because of the deal -> (i) US came out of the depression (ii) And get a decade of uninterrupted prosperity.

Support : GDP grew, unemployment shrunk, and optimism increased.

Now B says :
The considerable government expenditures and massive labor requirements engendered by America's entry into World War II in late 1941 helped employ Americans and grow GDP.

B clearly says that World War2 helped Americans to get the Job.
Hence we can't say that the deal singlehandedly did the job.

1. Drive, push, or cause to move in a particular direction, typically forward.
2. Spur or drive into a particular situation

The 1990 movie Pretty Woman singlehandedly propelled Julia Roberts to two decades of constant fame and fortune.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the statement above?

b) In 2000 Julia Roberts won an academy award for her portrayal of Erin Brockovich in the critically acclaimed and financially successful movie of the same name and.

Stuart Kovinsky wrote:

paes wrote:Stuart,

I don't understand how B is irrelevant.

-> Some <X> contend that New Deal singlehandedly propelled the United States out of the Great Depression and into decades of uninterrupted prosperity.

means that -> because of the deal -> (i) US came out of the depression (ii) And get a decade of uninterrupted prosperity.

Support : GDP grew, unemployment shrunk, and optimism increased.

Now B says :
The considerable government expenditures and massive labor requirements engendered by America's entry into World War II in late 1941 helped employ Americans and grow GDP.

B clearly says that World War2 helped Americans to get the Job.
Hence we can't say that the deal singlehandedly did the job.

Again, the problem is your interpretation of "propelled".

From the Merriam-Webster dictionary:

1. Drive, push, or cause to move in a particular direction, typically forward.
2. Spur or drive into a particular situation

When we say one thing propels another, we might mean that it's doing all the work; however, propel can also mean give the initial push to get things going. When we speak of one particular event propelling change, we're using the latter definition of the word.

So, even if later events helped out, the entire initial push could still have come from the New Deal.

Here's an analogous argument:

The 1990 movie Pretty Woman singlehandedly propelled Julia Roberts to two decades of constant fame and fortune.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the statement above?

b) In 2000 Julia Roberts won an academy award for her portrayal of Erin Brockovich in the critically acclaimed and financially successful movie of the same name and.

Does (b) weaken the argument that Pretty Woman gave Julia the huge push she needed to massive success? No - it just notes another event that later accelerated her career.

Stuart Kovinsky wrote:

paes wrote:Stuart,

I don't understand how B is irrelevant.

-> Some <X> contend that New Deal singlehandedly propelled the United States out of the Great Depression and into decades of uninterrupted prosperity.

means that -> because of the deal -> (i) US came out of the depression (ii) And get a decade of uninterrupted prosperity.

Support : GDP grew, unemployment shrunk, and optimism increased.

Now B says :
The considerable government expenditures and massive labor requirements engendered by America's entry into World War II in late 1941 helped employ Americans and grow GDP.

B clearly says that World War2 helped Americans to get the Job.
Hence we can't say that the deal singlehandedly did the job.

Again, the problem is your interpretation of "propelled".

From the Merriam-Webster dictionary:

1. Drive, push, or cause to move in a particular direction, typically forward.
2. Spur or drive into a particular situation

When we say one thing propels another, we might mean that it's doing all the work; however, propel can also mean give the initial push to get things going. When we speak of one particular event propelling change, we're using the latter definition of the word.

So, even if later events helped out, the entire initial push could still have come from the New Deal.

Here's an analogous argument:

The 1990 movie Pretty Woman singlehandedly propelled Julia Roberts to two decades of constant fame and fortune.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the statement above?

b) In 2000 Julia Roberts won an academy award for her portrayal of Erin Brockovich in the critically acclaimed and financially successful movie of the same name and.

Does (b) weaken the argument that Pretty Woman gave Julia the huge push she needed to massive success? No - it just notes another event that later accelerated her career.