OG2016 = To reduce waste of raw materials, the government of

[richachampion]

To reduce waste of raw materials, the government of Sperland is considering requiring household appliances to be broken down for salvage when discarded. To cover the cost of salvage, the government is planning to charge a fee, which would be imposed when the appliance is first sold. Imposing the fee at the time of salvage would reduce waste more effectively, however, because consumers tend to keep old appliances longer if they are faced with a fee for discarding them.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Increasing the cost of disposing of an appliance properly increases the incentive to dispose it improperly.
B. The fee provides manufacturers with no incentive to produce appliances that are more durable.
C. For people who have bought new appliances recently, the salvage fee would not need to be paid for a number of years.
D. People who sell their used, working appliances to others would not need to pay the salvage fee.
E. Many non functioning appliances that are currently discarded could be repaired at relatively little expense.

[richachampion]

OA: A

[richachampion]

EXPERTS PLEASE CHECK IF MY ANALYSIS IS CORRECT?

Causality >>
Imposing the fee at the time of salvage would reduce waste more effectively
Cause: Imposing the fee at the time of salvage
Effect: Would reduce waste more effectively

IN A if increasing would have been Imposing then the option would have been better.

I was down to D and A, but my understanding to discard D is -
It neither strengthen or undermines the causality that we have established above. It may be treated as weak strengthener because in a manner it justifies that it is better not to charge salvage fee at the time of purchase, but it is still unable to justify or weaken whether this will eventually help in dispoing or Not?

Is my analysis correct for discarding Option D.

[vinni.k]

Will really appreciate if any expert can give their analysis on this question

Thanks
Vinni

[GMATGuruNY]

To reduce waste of raw materials, the government of Sperland is considering requiring household appliances to be broken down for salvage when discarded. To cover the cost of salvage, the government is planning to charge a fee, which would be imposed when the appliance is first sold. Imposing the fee at the time of salvage would reduce waste more effectively, however, because consumers tend to keep old appliances longer if they are faced with a fee for discarding them.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Increasing the cost of disposing of an appliance properly increases the incentive to dispose it improperly.
B. The fee provides manufacturers with no incentive to produce appliances that are more durable.
C. For people who have bought new appliances recently, the salvage fee would not need to be paid for a number of years.
D. People who sell their used, working appliances to others would not need to pay the salvage fee.
E. Many non functioning appliances that are currently discarded could be repaired at relatively little expense.

To salvage an appliance is to break it down into parts so that the parts can be REUSED and the appliance is NOT turned into waste.

Plan: Impose a fee at the time of salvage rather than at the time of sale.
Conclusion: Waste will be reduced more effectively.

To weaken the conclusion, the correct answer must show that imposing a fee at the time of salvage will NOT reduce waste more effectively.

A: Increasing the cost of disposing of an appliance properly increases the incentive to dispose it improperly.
Here, imposing a fee when an appliance is discarded will induce people to dispose of the appliance improperly, with the result that the appliance will NOT be salvaged.
Since the appliance's parts will NOT be reused, the result will be an INCREASE in waste, WEAKENING the conclusion that imposing a fee at the time of salvage will reduce waste more effectively.

The correct answer is A.

D: People who sell their used, working appliances to others would not need to pay the salvage fee.
This information suggests that one way to avoid paying a fee at the time of salvage is to SELL an appliance rather than discard it, STRENGTHENING the conclusion that imposing a fee at the time of salvage will lead to a reduction in waste.
Eliminate D.

[richachampion]

Mr. Hunt,

Did you find my approach correct?

[GMATGuruNY]

Is my analysis correct for discarding Option D.

Looks good.

[richachampion]

Is my analysis correct for discarding Option D.

Looks good.

Thanks!

[gui_guimaraes]

To reduce waste of raw materials, the government of Sperland is considering requiring household appliances to be broken down for salvage when discarded. To cover the cost of salvage, the government is planning to charge a fee, which would be imposed when the appliance is first sold. Imposing the fee at the time of salvage would reduce waste more effectively, however, because consumers tend to keep old appliances longer if they are faced with a fee for discarding them.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Increasing the cost of disposing of an appliance properly increases the incentive to dispose it improperly.
B. The fee provides manufacturers with no incentive to produce appliances that are more durable.
C. For people who have bought new appliances recently, the salvage fee would not need to be paid for a number of years.
D. People who sell their used, working appliances to others would not need to pay the salvage fee.
E. Many non functioning appliances that are currently discarded could be repaired at relatively little expense.

To salvage an appliance is to break it down into parts so that the parts can be REUSED and the appliance is NOT turned into waste.

Plan: Impose a fee at the time of salvage rather than at the time of sale.
Conclusion: Waste will be reduced more effectively.

To weaken the conclusion, the correct answer must show that imposing a fee at the time of salvage will NOT reduce waste more effectively.

A: Increasing the cost of disposing of an appliance properly increases the incentive to dispose it improperly.
Here, imposing a fee when an appliance is discarded will induce people to dispose of the appliance improperly, with the result that the appliance will NOT be salvaged.
Since the appliance's parts will NOT be reused, the result will be an INCREASE in waste, WEAKENING the conclusion that imposing a fee at the time of salvage will reduce waste more effectively.

The correct answer is A.

D: People who sell their used, working appliances to others would not need to pay the salvage fee.
This information suggests that one way to avoid paying a fee at the time of salvage is to SELL an appliance rather than discard it, STRENGTHENING the conclusion that imposing a fee at the time of salvage will lead to a reduction in waste.
Eliminate D.

@GMATGuruNY why E is wrong? Tks!

[gentvenus]

A is correct. Imposing a fee when an appliance is discarded will induce people to dispose of the appliance improperly, with the result that the appliance will NOT be salvaged, INCREASING in waste, and WEAKENING the conclusion.