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

Redeem

Gov assistance

Expert replies
by showbu » Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:09 pm
Editorial: In Ledland, unemployed adults receive government assistance. To reduce unemployment, the government proposes to supplement the income of those who accept jobs that pay less than government assistance, thus enabling employers to hire workers cheaply. However, the supplement will not raise any worker’s income above what government assistance would provide if he or she were not gainfully employed. Therefore, unemployed people will have no financial incentive to accept jobs that would entitle them to the supplement.
Which of the following, if true about Ledland, most seriously weakens the argument of the editorial?

A. The government collects no taxes on assistance it provides to unemployed individuals and their families.
B. Neighboring countries with laws that mandate the minimum wage an employer must pay an employee have higher unemployment rates than Ledland currently has.
C. People who are employed and look for a new job tend to get higher-paying jobs than job seekers who are unemployed.
D. The yearly amount unemployed people receive from government assistance is less than the yearly income that the government defines as the poverty level.
E. People sometimes accept jobs that pay relatively little simply because they enjoy the work.

OA:Spoiler CodeC
Last edited by showbu on Wed Jan 14, 2009 4:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by mjjking » Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:26 pm
IMO C.

People go to work and earn less. The subside of the government would make them earn the same as unemployed people subsidized by the government. Hence, they don't have any stimulus to go to work.

So, why should they go to work (counter the argument of the editor)? Simply because ppl employed attract higher wages easier than ppl unemployed.

Hence C.
Beat The GMAT - 1st priority
Enter a top MBA program - 2nd priority
Loving my wife: MOST IMPORTANT OF ALL!

REAL THING 1 (AUG 2007): 680 (Q43, V40)
REAL THING 2 (APR 2009): 720 (Q47, V41)
Join the discussion

by canada_sms » Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:08 pm
I agree with mjjking. The conclusion is focused on the lack of a financial incentive so the correct answer will attack that. Answer C attacks this successfully by illustrating how there might be a financial incentive over a longer time horizon. Basically, take this job (with equal pay) as a stepping stone to a job with better pay.
Join the discussion

by pandeyvineet24 » Wed Jan 14, 2009 5:53 pm
Should be C. Reasoning same as above.
Join the discussion

by mason77 » Sat May 14, 2016 12:28 am
My bet is on B
Join the discussion