CR- weaken the argument

This topic has expert replies
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 11:37 pm

CR- weaken the argument

by gayu » Tue Apr 26, 2011 9:59 pm
Federal tax deductions for donations to nonprofit organizations, which include institutions of higher education, have remained basically unchanged over the past decade. There have been more corporate startups, especially in the internet industry, in the past five years than in any five-year period on record. Yet corporate donations to universities and colleges have decreased dramatically over the past few years. It must be that corporations today care less about the education of youth than they used to.
Which of the following, if true, would considerably weaken the conclusion above?
A) Enrollment at universities and colleges has declined in the past decade.
B) Tuition at universities and colleges has increased over the past decade.
C) The number of business students at universities have increased in the last 10 years.
D) Fixed costs for universities and colleges have increased sharply in the last 10 years.
E) Corporate net profits have declined over the past decade.

Pls explain the answer.
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 965
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 12:52 am
Thanked: 156 times
Followed by:34 members
GMAT Score:720

by vineeshp » Tue Apr 26, 2011 10:49 pm
OA E. If Net profits have declined, then Corporates may be unable to afford donations.
Vineesh,
Just telling you what I know and think. I am not the expert. :)

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 11:37 pm

by gayu » Tue Apr 26, 2011 10:53 pm
Here, according to me, conclusion is, "corporations today care less about the education of youth than they used to". Isn't it?
So choice C should be the right answer. What it has to do with choice E? what it has to do with Corporate net profits?? Whether its net profits increased or decreased, it doesn't matter.

Will you please explain it?

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1101
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 7:26 am
Thanked: 47 times
Followed by:13 members
GMAT Score:640

by HSPA » Tue Apr 26, 2011 10:58 pm
C and E are the only contenders and C > E

E is out of scope as it is only since last 5 years corporates are at a 'high'.
C says students have increased so if even if the funds from corporates remained constant. The ratio of amount per student has gone low, the RATIO has impact on school's maintiance.
First take: 640 (50M, 27V) - RC needs 300% improvement
Second take: coming soon..
Regards,
HSPA.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 9:44 pm
Thanked: 8 times

by sandy217 » Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:00 pm
Conclusion: "It must be that corporations today care less about the education of youth than they used to"
Any answer choice that hits the conclusion by stating other reasons for less funds from corporations will serve the purpose
E does that by stating corporations don't have money to fund , it is not that they r not interested in funding.

IMO E

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 9:44 pm
Thanked: 8 times

by sandy217 » Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:06 pm
HSPA wrote:C and E are the only contenders and C > E

E is out of scope as it is only since last 5 years corporates are at a 'high'.
C says students have increased so if even if the funds from corporates remained constant. The ratio of amount per student has gone low, the RATIO has impact on school's maintiance.
If question were to state funding per student has decreased dramatically, Yes C would be certainly the winner. But it said absolute figure has decreased. And E is not out of scope .It says since last decade profits have declined.The "previous few years" in discussion falls in the same decade, in which corporates have suffered declined profits.

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 8:25 am

by bohemian86 » Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:18 pm
The situation here is :
1). The tax deduction has considerably remained same.
2). The amount of companies has increased.
3). they donations have decreased.

Conclusion here is:
Corporations care less about the education of youth, because the donations have decreased by them.

Any choice that explains : the donations have not decreased because of their attitude (not caring about youth education), but because of some other reason will weaken the conclusion.

Hence choice E - since the profits have decreased, the donations have also decreased.

Regarding option C - the no. of business students increasing should have no effect on the amount of donation by companies.

Legendary Member
Posts: 2330
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:26 members

by mundasingh123 » Wed Apr 27, 2011 1:59 am
gayu wrote:Here, according to me, conclusion is, "corporations today care less about the education of youth than they used to". Isn't it?
So choice C should be the right answer. What it has to do with choice E? what it has to do with Corporate net profits?? Whether its net profits increased or decreased, it doesn't matter.

Will you please explain it?
We have to look for an option that proves the conclusion wrong.
C if anything only strengthens the conclusion.
I Seek Explanations Not Answers

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 218
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2010 2:43 pm
Thanked: 5 times

by cyrwr1 » Fri Apr 29, 2011 2:52 pm
Conclusion : Corporations have less interest on youth education
Premises : Tax deductions same. More startups in one industry and donations to institutes have fallen.

E provides a reason why firms may give less money the universities. Not necessarily that the firms are not interested. This is an alternative as to "what happened to the money?".

C states # of business students have gone up. Even if donations remained the same, funding/student will still fail. We are not concerned with this.

Hence, E is the answer.

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 9:27 am
GMAT Score:620

by chilledlife » Sat Jun 04, 2011 11:10 pm
IMO E.

This is because we are looking for a statement which justifies why the corporates cannot donate to the educational institutions. This should be other than the reason that corporates are not interested in youth education. E clearly mentions that corporates have a lower net profit. So this could mean that due to the lower net profit they are unable to contribute.

Legendary Member
Posts: 784
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 3:51 am
Thanked: 114 times
Followed by:12 members

by patanjali.purpose » Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:37 am
gayu wrote:Federal tax deductions for donations to nonprofit organizations, which include institutions of higher education, have remained basically unchanged over the past decade. There have been more corporate startups, especially in the internet industry, in the past five years than in any five-year period on record. Yet corporate donations to universities and colleges have decreased dramatically over the past few years. It must be that corporations today care less about the education of youth than they used to.
Which of the following, if true, would considerably weaken the conclusion above?
A) Enrollment at universities and colleges has declined in the past decade.
B) Tuition at universities and colleges has increased over the past decade.
C) The number of business students at universities have increased in the last 10 years.
D) Fixed costs for universities and colleges have increased sharply in the last 10 years.
E) Corporate net profits have declined over the past decade.

Pls explain the answer.
Weaken question
C: corporations care less about youth education than they used to
P: funding remains constant; more startups; corporate donation decreased

Possible assumptions:
a) though nos of companies increased, they are not funding education
b) income level of companies is good enough to support education

Lets see the options: correct answer will make the conclusion (ie coportion care less abt education)less true - ie correct answer will show corporations are Supportive

1) per head funding increased - but we are not sure why corporations funding more. Is it because they feel per head funding is more than desired or because they have insufficient money to donate. Not able to connect this choice with conclusion without any assumption ==> drop it
2) tution increased but still donations are constant - S
3) per student funding dropped - S
4) fixed cost increased - so what. Is it because rate of drop of students more than rate of drop of teachers. If so, per head funding will increase and it will weaken. But fixed cost can also increase if lets say nos of students increased...university have to open new class room or build new building etc - in that per head funding will decrease and it will strengthe. In any case we have to make many assumptions to connect this choice with argument and so drop this choice
5) net profits declined - this shows the fnding is still the same not because corporations are uninterested in youth but because their profit have declined. They have less disposal income to share. This also matches with the assumption.

IMO E

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 123
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 12:26 am
Location: Hyderabad
Thanked: 5 times
Followed by:1 members

by jainnikhil02 » Sun Jun 05, 2011 10:51 am
IMO E...
Nikhil K Jain
____________________

"Life is all about timing" Don't waste your and others time.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1309
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 5:34 am
Location: India
Thanked: 310 times
Followed by:123 members
GMAT Score:750

by cans » Sun Jun 05, 2011 8:35 pm
IMO E
If my post helped you- let me know by pushing the thanks button ;)

Contact me about long distance tutoring!
[email protected]

Cans!!

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 121
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 8:44 am
Thanked: 9 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:610

by singh181 » Sun Jun 05, 2011 8:47 pm
IMO E. E gives an alternate explanation for the decline in funding.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 174
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 3:41 pm
Thanked: 6 times
Followed by:1 members

by sanabk » Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:01 pm
E
Not because corporations care less about youth, but because corporate net profits have declined.

Best!!!