I received a PM asking me to comment.
I really dislike this problem and recommend that you do not study it. In the non-underlined portion, the last (dependent) clause seems to say that, because rents force them to use a large % of income, they don't have equity or tax write-offs. But that doesn't make sense - it's because they can't afford to buy. So that right there makes me not trust this problem.
The structure of the original sentence:
As subordinate clause, independent clause, and independent clause, and independent clause, dependent clause
Three independent clauses in the same sentence, all introduced via "and"? Highly unlikely for a correct answer on the GMAT. Using only "and" introduces some ambiguity - is there a connection between these clauses or not? Technically, I could say: I have brown hair and I like milk. I may be trying to say those two things have some connection or I may just be telling you two unrelated facts about myself. We don't know.
So, in this sentence, are these different pieces of info related? If so, why do I have so many independent clauses connected by "and"? There are other coordinating conjunctions I could use instead that would actually give some info about the connection here (such as for, but, yet, so...).
B changes the structure to:
As subordinate clause, independent clause, since subordinate clause, furthermore conjunctive adverb independent clause, dependent clause
And the problem is with the furthermore bit. When you have two independent clauses connected by a conjunctive adverb, you're supposed to use a semi-colon between them, not just a comma.
Here's a simpler sentence that might make this easier to understand:
She studies hard; furthermore, she always makes sure to get a good night's sleep before tests.
vs.
She studies hard, furthermore, she always makes sure to get a good night's sleep before tests.
The first is correct; the second is not. (The only difference is the semi-colon vs. comma.)
So, can't be B.
In C, we change the "and" for the 2nd independent clause to a "for." "for is still a coordinating conjunction (that is, it introduces an independent clause), but now it actually gives us some info about the connection here: the prior info (families are hard-hit) is a result of the subsequent info (b/c they can no longer afford to buy homes). That makes sense.
The "yet" contrast here is (I believe) intended to point out the "buy vs. rent" choice / contrast here. Which is sort of okay - it's not a great use of contrast, but you could argue that there's a contrast: you can either buy or rent. So okay.
D keeps the "and" for the second indepedent clause but removes the "and" for the third one. It's still a little problematic, b/c I don't know what the connection is between the first two. The larger problem is the semi-colon + however. Now that definitely cuts off the second half of the sentence, and that "leaving" clause can't refer to buying.
E gives us a connection between the second and third independents that doesn't make sense - can't afford to buy, for rents force them to use too high % of income? That's not why they can't afford to buy.
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!
Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Learn more about me
Lets go with C!
