The recent decline in the value of the dollar was triggered by a prediction of slower economic growth in the...

GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions

Source: Official Guide

Critical Reasoning

Weaken

MEDIUM

...

Notes

Post a Query

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?

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

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

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

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

When there is a large budget deficit, other events in addition to predictions of slower economic growth sometimes trigger declines in currency value.

Solution

Passage Analysis:

Text from Passage	Analysis
The recent decline in the value of the dollar was triggered by a prediction of slower economic growth in the coming year.	What it says: The dollar dropped because people predicted slower economic growth What it does: Sets up the basic cause-and-effect relationship we're examining What it is: Author's factual claim about recent events
But that prediction would not have adversely affected the dollar had it not been for the government's huge budget deficit	What it says: The economic growth prediction would only hurt the dollar because of the big budget deficit What it does: Challenges the simple cause-and-effect from the first statement by introducing a deeper underlying cause What it is: Author's claim about the real root cause Visualization: Growth prediction alone = no dollar drop; Growth prediction + budget deficit = dollar drop
which must therefore be decreased to prevent future currency declines.	What it says: We need to reduce the budget deficit to stop future dollar drops What it does: Draws the logical conclusion from the previous analysis about what action to take What it is: Author's main conclusion and recommendation

Argument Flow:

The argument starts with an observed effect (dollar decline), identifies an apparent cause (growth prediction), then reveals the real underlying cause (budget deficit), and finally recommends a solution (reduce the deficit).

Main Conclusion:

The government's budget deficit must be decreased to prevent future currency declines.

Logical Structure:

The author argues that since the budget deficit made the dollar vulnerable to predictions about economic growth, removing that vulnerability (by reducing the deficit) will prevent similar currency drops in the future. This follows a 'remove the underlying cause to prevent the effect' logic.

Prethinking:

Question type:

Weaken - We need to find information that would reduce our belief in the conclusion that decreasing the budget deficit will prevent future currency declines

Precision of Claims

The conclusion makes a specific causal claim about what action (decreasing budget deficit) will prevent a specific outcome (future currency declines). The argument assumes budget deficit is the key underlying factor that makes economic predictions harmful to the dollar.

Strategy

To weaken this conclusion, we need to find scenarios that suggest decreasing the budget deficit either won't prevent future currency declines or that there are other factors more important than the budget deficit. We can attack the causal relationship between budget deficit and currency vulnerability, or show that other factors could cause currency declines regardless of deficit levels.

Answer Choices Explained

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

This tells us about the government's past efforts (or lack thereof) to reduce the deficit, but it doesn't challenge whether reducing the deficit would actually prevent future currency declines. The conclusion is about what should be done, not about what has been attempted. This doesn't weaken the causal relationship the argument establishes.

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

This addresses a different causal relationship than what the argument focuses on. The argument isn't claiming that the budget deficit causes slow growth predictions - it's claiming that the deficit makes the dollar vulnerable when such predictions occur. Even if the deficit doesn't cause growth slowdowns, it could still make the dollar more susceptible to decline when predictions happen for other reasons.

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

This shows that dollar declines happened before the recent prediction, but it doesn't tell us what caused those earlier declines or whether they were related to the budget deficit. The argument is specifically about how predictions of slower growth affect the dollar, so other causes of decline don't directly challenge the conclusion about preventing future declines from such predictions.

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

This directly contradicts the argument's key claim that predictions would not have adversely affected the dollar without the huge budget deficit. If predictions frequently caused dollar declines even before there was a large deficit, then the deficit isn't the underlying factor that makes predictions harmful. This seriously weakens the conclusion because it suggests that reducing the deficit won't prevent future declines caused by growth predictions - such predictions were already causing problems before the deficit existed.

When there is a large budget deficit, other events in addition to predictions of slower economic growth sometimes trigger declines in currency value.

This actually supports the idea that the budget deficit makes the dollar vulnerable to various negative events, including but not limited to growth predictions. Rather than weakening the argument, this strengthens the case that the deficit is a problematic underlying factor that should be addressed.

Rate this Solution

Tell us what you think about this solution

...

Forum Discussions

Start a new discussion

Post

Previous Attempts

Loading attempts...