For-profit Social Organizations serve far fewer citizens whom they serve than either public or private non-profit ones. At the same time, relative to non-profit Social Organizations, for-profit Social Organizations draw a disproportionate share of federal and state financial aid, such as food grants and guaranteed loans, for the people they serve. It must be, then, that for-profit Social Organizations cater to a greater proportion of financially disadvantaged citizens than do non-profit Social Organizations.
The conclusion above depends on which of the following assumptions?
A) Public non-profit Social Organizations and private non-profit Social Organizations serve a similar proportion of financially disadvantaged citizens.
B) For-profit Social Organizations do not engage in fraudulent practices to obtain unneeded federal and state financial aid in order to in help the people they serve.
C) The number of citizens that get benefited from federal and state financial aid at for-profit Social Organizations is greater than the number of citizens that get benefited from federal and state financial aid at non-profit Social Organizations.
D) For-profit Social Organizations are of similar residential and educational quality as non-profit Social Organizations.
E) The majority of citizens that are served at for-profit Social Organizations do not have a past criminal record or a bad credit history.
my doubt: i feel that the assumption of this argument should have been: For-profit Social Organizations do not spend money that they receive for purposes other than helping financially disadvantaged citizens
the conclusion is: for-profit Social Organizations cater to a greater proportion of financially disadvantaged citizens than do non-profit Social Organizations.
premise 1: For-profit Social Organizations serve far fewer citizens whom they serve than either public or private non-profit ones
premise 2: relative to non-profit Social Organizations, for-profit Social Organizations draw a disproportionate share of federal and state financial aid, such as food grants and guaranteed loans, for the people they serve
i fail to understand as how B can be answer here? even if For-profit Social Organizations do engage in fraudulent practices to obtain unneeded federal and state financial aid then also the argument will hold
on the other hand if we say that For-profit Social Organizations do spend money that they receive for purposes other than helping financially disadvantaged citizens THEN we cannot make the conclusion that for-profit Social Organizations cater to a greater proportion of financially disadvantaged citizens than do non-profit Social Organizations
Doubt CR 3
This topic has expert replies
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 774
- Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:32 am
- Thanked: 46 times
- Followed by:14 members
GMAT/MBA Expert
- [email protected]
- Elite Legendary Member
- Posts: 10392
- Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2013 6:38 pm
- Location: Palo Alto, CA
- Thanked: 2867 times
- Followed by:511 members
- GMAT Score:800
Hi aditya8062,
First off, what is the source of this question? It has a LOT of typos and is poorly-worded in spots.
CR questions can involve several assumptions, so you have to be flexible enough to look for a second or third possible assumption when the "obvious" assumption that you're looking for is not among the answer choices.
Here, we're told that For-profit Social Organizations serve fewer citizens but receive a disproportionate share (re: larger) of money/aid for the citizens they serve.....than public/private non-profit organizations.
The conclusion that For-profit Social Organizations cater to a GREATER PROPORTION of financially disadvantaged citizens (than Non-profit ones) requires a number of assumptions for the logic to hold.
Often, assumptions "confirm" an idea that was not stated. Sometimes though, an assumption "removes a potential negative" from the logic. In this prompt, the correct answer removes a negative by telling us something that For-profit organizations are not doing (they're not being fraudulent).
GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
First off, what is the source of this question? It has a LOT of typos and is poorly-worded in spots.
CR questions can involve several assumptions, so you have to be flexible enough to look for a second or third possible assumption when the "obvious" assumption that you're looking for is not among the answer choices.
Here, we're told that For-profit Social Organizations serve fewer citizens but receive a disproportionate share (re: larger) of money/aid for the citizens they serve.....than public/private non-profit organizations.
The conclusion that For-profit Social Organizations cater to a GREATER PROPORTION of financially disadvantaged citizens (than Non-profit ones) requires a number of assumptions for the logic to hold.
Often, assumptions "confirm" an idea that was not stated. Sometimes though, an assumption "removes a potential negative" from the logic. In this prompt, the correct answer removes a negative by telling us something that For-profit organizations are not doing (they're not being fraudulent).
GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 774
- Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:32 am
- Thanked: 46 times
- Followed by:14 members
how does the fact that they are not fraudulent helps to prove the conclusion? even if they are "fraudulent" they can still cater to a greater proportion of financially disadvantaged citizens than do non-profit Social Organizations.In this prompt, the correct answer removes a negative by telling us something that For-profit organizations are not doing (they're not being fraudulent).
- GMATGuruNY
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 15539
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
- Location: New York, NY
- Thanked: 13060 times
- Followed by:1906 members
- GMAT Score:790
Do not focus solely on the conclusion.aditya8062 wrote:For-profit Social Organizations serve far fewer citizens whom they serve than either public or private non-profit ones. At the same time, relative to non-profit Social Organizations, for-profit Social Organizations draw a disproportionate share of federal and state financial aid, such as food grants and guaranteed loans, for the people they serve. It must be, then, that for-profit Social Organizations cater to a greater proportion of financially disadvantaged citizens than do non-profit Social Organizations.
The conclusion above depends on which of the following assumptions?
A) Public non-profit Social Organizations and private non-profit Social Organizations serve a similar proportion of financially disadvantaged citizens.
B) For-profit Social Organizations do not engage in fraudulent practices to obtain unneeded federal and state financial aid in order to in help the people they serve.
C) The number of citizens that get benefited from federal and state financial aid at for-profit Social Organizations is greater than the number of citizens that get benefited from federal and state financial aid at non-profit Social Organizations.
D) For-profit Social Organizations are of similar residential and educational quality as non-profit Social Organizations.
E) The majority of citizens that are served at for-profit Social Organizations do not have a past criminal record or a bad credit history.
my doubt: i feel that the assumption of this argument should have been: For-profit Social Organizations do not spend money that they receive for purposes other than helping financially disadvantaged citizens
the conclusion is: for-profit Social Organizations cater to a greater proportion of financially disadvantaged citizens than do non-profit Social Organizations.
premise 1: For-profit Social Organizations serve far fewer citizens whom they serve than either public or private non-profit ones
premise 2: relative to non-profit Social Organizations, for-profit Social Organizations draw a disproportionate share of federal and state financial aid, such as food grants and guaranteed loans, for the people they serve
i fail to understand as how B can be answer here? even if For-profit Social Organizations do engage in fraudulent practices to obtain unneeded federal and state financial aid then also the argument will hold
on the other hand if we say that For-profit Social Organizations do spend money that they receive for purposes other than helping financially disadvantaged citizens THEN we cannot make the conclusion that for-profit Social Organizations cater to a greater proportion of financially disadvantaged citizens than do non-profit Social Organizations
Focus on the LINK between the premise and the conclusion.
The argument concludes that there is ONLY ONE POSSIBLE EXPLANATION for the disproportionate funds drawn by for-profit organizations:
It must be that for-profit Social Organizations cater to a greater proportion of financially disadvantaged citizens.
The argument LINKS drawing disproportionate funds to helping a greater proportion of financially disadvantaged citizens.
The assumption is that there is NO OTHER POSSIBLE EXPLANATION for the disproportionate funds drawn by for-profit organizations.
Since the assumption is WHAT MUST BE TRUE, apply the NEGATION TEST.
When the correct answer choice is negated, the LINK between drawing the funds and helping the poor will be broken.
B, negated:
For-profit Social Organizations engage in fraudulent practices to obtain unneeded federal and state financial aid.
The negation of B suggests an ALTERNATE REASON for the disproportionate funds drawn by for-profit organizations, invalidating the conclusion that it must be that for-profit Social Organizations cater to a greater proportion of financially disadvantaged citizens.
Since the negation of B trashes the link between drawing the funds and helping the poor, B is the correct assumption: WHAT MUST BE TRUE for the conclusion to be valid.
The correct answer is B.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.
As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.
For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.
As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.
For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
-
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 774
- Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:32 am
- Thanked: 46 times
- Followed by:14 members
Thanks Guru
what i gather from here is that premises lead to the conclusion . the link between the premise and the conclusion is the Assumption. Assumptions are in a way strengthener of an argument . So in some case the assumption might not be the link between the premise and conclusion BUT it might support the premise thereby STRENGTHENING the conclusion (as is the case here)
the assumption "For-profit Social Organizations do not engage in fraudulent practices to obtain unneeded federal and state financial aid in order to in help the people they serve" is providing support to the premise "relative to non-profit Social Organizations, for-profit Social Organizations draw a disproportionate share of federal and state financial aid, such as food grants and guaranteed loans, for the people they serve"
please tell me if my interpretation is correct
what i gather from here is that premises lead to the conclusion . the link between the premise and the conclusion is the Assumption. Assumptions are in a way strengthener of an argument . So in some case the assumption might not be the link between the premise and conclusion BUT it might support the premise thereby STRENGTHENING the conclusion (as is the case here)
the assumption "For-profit Social Organizations do not engage in fraudulent practices to obtain unneeded federal and state financial aid in order to in help the people they serve" is providing support to the premise "relative to non-profit Social Organizations, for-profit Social Organizations draw a disproportionate share of federal and state financial aid, such as food grants and guaranteed loans, for the people they serve"
please tell me if my interpretation is correct
- Rastis
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 183
- Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 7:06 am
- Location: Washington, DC
- Thanked: 6 times
- Followed by:2 members
- GMAT Score:500
I feel like you choose B because the other answer choices are out of focus. However, the idea that fraudulent practices are suggested as a reason seems to be out of focus as well BUT somewhat points to the mechanics of For-profit business.
- GMATGuruNY
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 15539
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
- Location: New York, NY
- Thanked: 13060 times
- Followed by:1906 members
- GMAT Score:790
The OA is wholly relevant.Rastis wrote:I feel like you choose B because the other answer choices are out of focus. However, the idea that fraudulent practices are suggested as a reason seems to be out of focus as well BUT somewhat points to the mechanics of For-profit business.
If for-profit organizations CHEAT -- if they commit FRAUD to obtain unnecessary funding -- then the argument cannot conclude that these organizations use their funding to cater to a greater proportion of financially disadvantaged citizens.
Thus, in concluding that for-profit organizations do in fact cater to a greater proportion of financially disadvantaged citizens, the argument is assuming that these organizations do not engage in fraudulent practices to obtain unneeded federal and state financial aid.
An analagous argument:
John gets a high score on every biology test.
Clearly, John must spend a lot of time studying.
The conclusion above depends on which of the following assumptions?
Correct: John does not regularly cheat when he takes a biology test.
A word of advice:
Do not be too quick to deem an answer choice out of scope.
The GMAT writers are very adept at creating correct answer choices that seem irrelevant but are in fact very much on point.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.
As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.
For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.
As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.
For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3