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

Redeem

$ value

Expert replies
by aj5105 » Thu Jun 11, 2009 2:46 am
The recent decline in the value of the dollar was triggered by a prediction of slower economic growth in the coming year. But that prediction would not have adversely affected the dollar had it not been for the government’s huge budget deficit, which must therefore be decreased to prevent future currency declines.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion about how to prevent future currency declines?

(A) The government has made little attempt to reduce the budget deficit.

(B) The budget deficit has not caused a slowdown in economic growth.

(C) The value of the dollar declined several times in the year prior to the recent prediction of slower economic growth.

(D) Before there was a large budget deficit, predictions of slower economic growth frequently caused declines in the dollar’s value.

(E) When there is a large budget deficit, other events in addition to predictions of slower economic growth sometimes trigger declines in currency value.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by tohellandback » Thu Jun 11, 2009 2:54 am
IMO D:
author says it was not the prediction of slower economic growth in the coming year but the government’s huge budget deficit that triggered the decline in the value of the dollar.

D clearly says that even without a large budget deficit, predictions of slower economic growth frequently caused declines in the dollar’s value.
The powers of two are bloody impolite!!
Join the discussion

by turbo jet » Thu Jun 11, 2009 4:57 am
IMO: D
Life is Tom; I am Jerry ;)
Join the discussion

by ketkoag » Thu Jun 11, 2009 5:18 am
D clearly weakens the argument.
Join the discussion

by aj5105 » Thu Jun 11, 2009 7:12 am
OA (D)
Join the discussion

by Domnu » Thu Jun 11, 2009 2:41 pm
I arrived at D as well; however, I was considering E as a candidate until I realized that D was a much stronger answer. Can someone point out why E is clearly not a viable response?
Have you wondered how you could have found such a treasure? -T
Join the discussion

by turbo jet » Thu Jun 11, 2009 9:00 pm
Hi Dommu,

To anser your query on why E is eliminated.

We need to focus on the author's conclusion in this argument.
Conclusion: Currency value is declining

Next what are my premises:
a. Slow eco growth
b. Large budget deficit

Which premise/evidence is the author strongly supporting?
Large budget deficit

Thus E gets rejected on 2 possible grounds:

1. E is assuming that large budget deficit has already occurred.
Clue: "When there is a large budget deficit" So E is not weakening the stronger evidence of the author. It is instead assuming it to be true.

2. In the second clause in the sentence , E is undermining the first premise but not too strongly. Clue: Because the phrase "Sometimes " is used.


So on either/ both of the above grounds, E gets eliminated


Hope this helps!!!!

Cheers
TJ
:)
Life is Tom; I am Jerry ;)
Join the discussion

by mason77 » Sun May 15, 2016 2:45 pm
Also option D
Join the discussion