Our Premium and Ultimate plans guarantee up to 90+ points score increase or your money back.
We cover every section of the GMAT with in-depth lessons, 5000+ practice questions and realistic practice tests.
Study whenever and wherever you want with our iOS and Android mobile apps.
Adaptive learning technology focuses on your academic weaknesses.
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?
Annoyed and unsatisfied with the services provided by banks, a consumer single-handedly created a new banking system. The new system gained popularity rapidly, soon controlling a large portion of the market, and consequently leading to the bankruptcy of a few large banks. These cases of bankruptcy resulted in the unemployment of thousands of people. The government intervened, terminating all business related to the new banking system on the basis of the claim that it was the root of the unemployment, and a potential economic crisis. Nevertheless, in the interests of economic health, this forced closure of the new banking system should be revoked since __________.
This answer choice weakens the conclusion and, therefore, cannot logically complete the argument. This statement lays the responsibility of unemployment (economic effect) on the creator of the new system. Therefore, it weakens the idea that he has the new system should not be abolished.
This answer choice strengthens the conclusion and logically completes the argument by suggesting that in contrast to the other banks, the new system banking does not harm the economy. This answer choice shifts the blame for unemployment and economic malaise to the banks' previous methods, thus undermining the claim that the new banking system was responsible for the downward economic turn, and relieving it of the responsibility for the crash.
This answer choice weakens the conclusion and, therefore, cannot logically complete the argument. By highlighting the seriousness of unemployment, this statement makes the new system responsible for much larger damages.
This answer choice does not explain why the new system should be kept and, therefore, cannot logically complete the argument. The new system is, in fact, also a bank so this statement about not using banks at all doesn't help us support the conclusion that the new system shouldn't be abolished.
While this answer choice sides with the new banking system, it fails to explain its contribution to economic health, and therefore cannot logically complete the argument. Even if the banks were at fault for the rise of the new system, the new banking system cannot be justified if it is the actual cause of unemployment.