Sarah: andquot;I dont understand why you recycle so much. The recycling program costs the city several million dollars a year. Trash disposal at the landfill costs half as much per household than the municipal recycling program. It just doesnt seem cost effective to have a recycling program.andquot;Lauren: andquot;The point of recycling isnt to save money. By recycling, we keep thousands of tons of materials out of our landfills, which mean we can use the same landfills longer. Its about conserving our resources, not about saving money on trash pickup.andquot;Laurens response to Sarah serves toa)Support Sarahandrsquo;s contention that recycling is too expensive.b)Refute Sarahandrsquo;s argument that recycling is more expensive than taking trash to the landfill.c)Suggest to Sarah that there is an alternate view of why recycling makes good sense for the people of their city.d)Points to a fundamental value difference between the two when it comes to conservation.e)Points out her ignorance of municipal finances.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

GMAT Exam > GMAT Questions > Sarah: "I dont understand why you recycl...

Sarah: "I don't understand why you recycle so much. The recycling program costs the city several million dollars a year. Trash disposal at the landfill costs half as much per household than the municipal recycling program. It just doesn't seem cost effective to have a recycling program."

Lauren: "The point of recycling isn't to save money. By recycling, we keep thousands of tons of materials out of our landfills, which mean we can use the same landfills longer. It's about conserving our resources, not about saving money on trash pickup."

Lauren's response to Sarah serves to

a)
Support Sarah’s contention that recycling is too expensive.
b)
Refute Sarah’s argument that recycling is more expensive than taking trash to the landfill.
c)
Suggest to Sarah that there is an alternate view of why recycling makes good sense for the people of their city.
d)
Points to a fundamental value difference between the two when it comes to conservation.
e)
Points out her ignorance of municipal finances.

Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Join for Free

Join for Free

Verified Answer

Sarah: "I dont understand why you recycle so much. The recycling ...

A. Support Sarah’s contention that recycling is too expensive.
This option is not supported by Lauren's response. Lauren disagrees with Sarah's focus on cost-effectiveness and instead emphasizes the importance of conserving resources through recycling. Lauren's response does not support Sarah's argument that recycling is too expensive.

B. Refute Sarah’s argument that recycling is more expensive than taking trash to the landfill.
This option is supported by Lauren's response. Sarah argues that the recycling program is not cost-effective compared to landfill disposal. However, Lauren counters this argument by stating that the purpose of recycling is not primarily about saving money but about conserving resources and reducing waste in landfills. By refuting Sarah's cost-focused argument, Lauren suggests that recycling has benefits beyond just financial considerations.

C. Suggest to Sarah that there is an alternate view of why recycling makes good sense for the people of their city.
This option is strongly supported by Lauren's response. Lauren presents an alternate perspective to Sarah by highlighting the environmental benefits of recycling and the importance of conserving resources. By doing so, Lauren suggests that there is another viewpoint that considers the broader implications of recycling beyond its cost-effectiveness.

D. Points to a fundamental value difference between the two when it comes to conservation.
This option is supported by Lauren's response. Lauren's emphasis on conserving resources through recycling while downplaying the financial aspect suggests a fundamental difference in values between her and Sarah. Sarah focuses on the cost-effectiveness of the recycling program, while Lauren prioritizes the long-term benefits of conserving resources.

E. Points out her ignorance of municipal finances.
This option is not supported by Lauren's response. While Lauren disagrees with Sarah's cost-focused argument, she does not directly point out any ignorance on Sarah's part regarding municipal finances. Lauren's response revolves more around the broader purpose and benefits of recycling.

Based on the conversation, option (C) is the most accurate explanation of Lauren's response to Sarah.

View all questions of this test

Most Upvoted Answer

Sarah: "I dont understand why you recycle so much. The recycling ...

Based on the conversation, option (C) is the most accurate explanation of Lauren's response to Sarah.

Answered by Talent Skill Learning · View profile

Free Test

FREE

Test: Inference
10 Ques | 20 Min

Start Free Test

View all free GMAT tests

Community Answer

Sarah: "I dont understand why you recycle so much. The recycling ...

Lauren's response to Sarah:

Pointing out the primary objective of recycling:
Lauren explains to Sarah that the main goal of recycling is not to save money but to conserve resources. By recycling, the city can keep thousands of tons of materials out of landfills, which in turn helps in using the landfills more efficiently and for a longer period of time.

Highlighting the benefits of recycling:
She emphasizes that the benefits of recycling go beyond just the cost-effectiveness of trash disposal. Recycling helps in reducing waste, conserving natural resources, and protecting the environment. Therefore, the value of recycling lies in its long-term environmental benefits rather than just immediate financial gains.

Offering an alternate perspective:
Lauren suggests to Sarah that there is another viewpoint to consider when evaluating the effectiveness of the recycling program. She implies that while cost may be a factor, the true significance of recycling lies in its positive impact on the environment and sustainability of resources.
In conclusion, Lauren's response aims to shed light on the broader purpose of recycling and to encourage Sarah to consider the environmental benefits of the program rather than solely focusing on its financial costs.

View all answers Start learning for free

Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Similar GMAT Doubts

Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question as follow:It is not uncommon for close synonyms to be understood to share the same meaning. The difference between words like “hard” and “difficult”, for example, goes tragically unnoticed. One may employ one or the other with complete indifference, postulating no discrepancy between them. In general, this is well and good; most people lack the scrupulous pedanticalness to quibble over such trifles. Nevertheless, for those of us with ample compulsiveness (and tim e), it is of significant value to comprehend such nuances.Take for example the following sentences: 1) The test was hard. 2) The test was difficult. Is the difference between these synonyms readily apparent? Is there a noticeable difference between them at all? Indeed, these questions are valid and warrant answers. For, what would be the point to having multiple words with the exact same meaning? No, that would be superfluous; the English language being far too economical.While many close synonyms share similar, if not the same, dictionary definitions, the feeling, or mood, they convey is utterly singular. Although a dictionary can provide information about word meanings, pronunciations, etymologies, inflected forms, derived forms, etc., it cannot communicate how it feels to use a word.Granted, the notion that close synonyms can be used interchangeably is prevalent among English speakers. And alas, the dictionary—the text purported to be responsible for clarifying such issues—is of little assistance. In the end, it is left to us, the speakers of the language, those actively responsible for maintaining its sustenance and generation, to understand how these words make us feel and what mood we are inclined to attach to them. Using the examples and insights described above, one may come to recognize these subtle, yet crucial, differences.Q.Which of the following would the author of the passage most likely agreewith?.

View answer

Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question as follow.Among the speculative questions which arise in connection with the study of arithmetic from a historical standpoint, the origin of number is one that has provoked much lively discussion, and has led to a great amount of learned research among the primitive and savage languages of the human race. A few simple considerations will, however, show that such research must necessarily leave this question entirely unsettled, and will indicate clearly that it is, from the very nature of things, a question to which no definite and final answer can be given. Among the barbarous tribes whose languages have been studied, even in a most cursory manner, none have ever been discovered which did not show some familiarity with the number concept. The knowledge thus indicated has often proved to be most limited; not extending beyond the numbers 1 and 2, or 1, 2, and 3. At first thought it seems quite inconceivable that any human being should be destitute of the power of counting beyond 2. But such is the case; and in a few instances languages have been found to be absolutely destitute of pure numeral words.These facts must of necessity deter the mathematician from seeking to push his investigation too far back toward the very origin of number. Philosophers have endeavoured to establish certain propositions concerning this subject, but, as might have been expected, have failed to reach any common ground of agreement. Whewell has maintained that “such propositions as that two and three make five are necessary truths, containing in them an element of certainty beyond that which mere experience can give.” Mill, on the other hand, argues that any such statement merely expresses a truth derived from early and constant experience; and in this view he is heartily supported by Tylor.But why this question should provoke controversy, it is difficult for the mathematician to understand. Either view would seem to be correct, according to the standpoint from which the question is approached. We know of no language in which the suggestion of number does not appear, and we must admit that the words which give expression to the number sense would be among the early words to be formed in any language. They express ideas which are, at first, wholly concrete, which are of the greatest possible simplicity, and which seem in many ways to be clearly understood, even by the higher orders of the brute creation. The origin of number would in itself, then, appear to lie beyond the proper limits of inquiry; and the primitive conception of number to be fundamental with human thought.Q.What does the line, in the third para, ‘primitive conception of number to be fundamental with human thought’ mean?

View answer

Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question as follow.Among the speculative questions which arise in connection with the study of arithmetic from a historical standpoint, the origin of number is one that has provoked much lively discussion, and has led to a great amount of learned research among the primitive and savage languages of the human race. A few simple considerations will, however, show that such research must necessarily leave this question entirely unsettled, and will indicate clearly that it is, from the very nature of things, a question to which no definite and final answer can be given. Among the barbarous tribes whose languages have been studied, even in a most cursory manner, none have ever been discovered which did not show some familiarity with the number concept. The knowledge thus indicated has often proved to be most limited; not extending beyond the numbers 1 and 2, or 1, 2, and 3. At first thought it seems quite inconceivable that any human being should be destitute of the power of counting beyond 2. But such is the case; and in a few instances languages have been found to be absolutely destitute of pure numeral words.These facts must of necessity deter the mathematician from seeking to push his investigation too far back toward the very origin of number. Philosophers have endeavoured to establish certain propositions concerning this subject, but, as might have been expected, have failed to reach any common ground of agreement. Whewell has maintained that “such propositions as that two and three make five are necessary truths, containing in them an element of certainty beyond that which mere experience can give.” Mill, on the other hand, argues that any such statement merely expresses a truth derived from early and constant experience; and in this view he is heartily supported by Tylor.But why this question should provoke controversy, it is difficult for the mathematician to understand. Either view would seem to be correct, according to the standpoint from which the question is approached. We know of no language in which the suggestion of number does not appear, and we must admit that the words which give expression to the number sense would be among the early words to be formed in any language. They express ideas which are, at first, wholly concrete, which are of the greatest possible simplicity, and which seem in many ways to be clearly understood, even by the higher orders of the brute creation. The origin of number would in itself, then, appear to lie beyond the proper limits of inquiry; and the primitive conception of number to be fundamental with human thought.Q.The author of the passage would most probably agree with each of the following EXCEPT

View answer

Directions: Read the given passage carefully and answer the question as follow:It is not uncommon for close synonyms to be understood to share the same meaning. The difference between words like “hard” and “difficult”, for example, goes tragically unnoticed. One may employ one or the other with complete indifference, postulating no discrepancy between them. In general, this is well and good; most people lack the scrupulous pedanticalness to quibble over such trifles. Nevertheless, for those of us with ample compulsiveness (and tim e), it is of significant value to comprehend such nuances.Take for example the following sentences: 1) The test was hard. 2) The test was difficult. Is the difference between these synonyms readily apparent? Is there a noticeable difference between them at all? Indeed, these questions are valid and warrant answers. For, what would be the point to having multiple words with the exact same meaning? No, that would be superfluous; the English language being far too economical.While many close synonyms share similar, if not the same, dictionary definitions, the feeling, or mood, they convey is utterly singular. Although a dictionary can provide information about word meanings, pronunciations, etymologies, inflected forms, derived forms, etc., it cannot communicate how it feels to use a word.Granted, the notion that close synonyms can be used interchangeably is prevalent among English speakers. And alas, the dictionary—the text purported to be responsible for clarifying such issues—is of little assistance. In the end, it is left to us, the speakers of the language, those actively responsible for maintaining its sustenance and generation, to understand how these words make us feel and what mood we are inclined to attach to them. Using the examples and insights described above, one may come to recognize these subtle, yet crucial, differences.Q.According tothe passage, each of the following is true of a dictionary EXCEPT

View answer

The movement for women’s rights traces its origin to the first half of the nineteenth century. The Seneca Falls Convention, held in Seneca Falls, New York in July of 1848, is commonly regarded as the beginning of the women’s rights movement in the United States. This conference was preceded by a series of ground-breaking events that made possible this seminal milestone in the history of American women.The idea for the convention emerged during the 1840 World Anti-Slavery Convention in London, a conference that precluded its female delegates from participation in discussions. Lucretia Mott, a famous women’s rights activist, wrote in her diary that calling the 1840 convention a “world” convention “was a mere poetical license.” She had accompanied her husband to London but had to sit behind a partition with other women activists, including Elizabeth Cady Stanton, who later became one of the main forces behind the Seneca Falls Convention.During the early 1840s, Elizabeth Cady Stanton composed the Declaration of Sentiments, a document modeled after the Declaration of Independence, declaring the rights of women. At the time of its composition, the Declaration of Sentiments was so bold that when Elizabeth Stanton showed the draft to her husband, he stated that if she read it at the Seneca Falls Convention, he would have to leave town. The Declaration contained several new resolutions. It proclaimed that all men and women are born equal and stated that no man could withhold a woman’s rights, take her property, or preclude her from the right to vote. This Declaration also became the foundation for the Seneca Falls Convention.On July 19-20, 1848, the Seneca Falls Convention brought together 240 delegates between ages 22 and 60, including forty men, who spent the two days at the conference debating, refining and voting on the Declaration of Sentiments. Most of the declaration’s resolutions received unanimous support and were officially endorsed. Later in 1848, the Seneca Falls convention was followed by an even larger meeting in Rochester, New York. Thereafter, national women’s conventions were held annually, contributing to the growing momentum in the movement for women’s rights.Q.Which of the following can be most reasonably inferred from the passage?

View answer

Top Courses for GMATView all

GMAT Focus Edition Mock Test Series 2025

Quantitative for GMAT

Crash Course for GMAT

Data Insights for GMAT

100 RCs for GMAT

Top Courses for GMAT

View all

Sarah: "I dont understand why you recycle so much. The recycling program costs the city several million dollars a year. Trash disposal at the landfill costs half as much per household than the municipal recycling program. It just doesnt seem cost effective to have a recycling program."Lauren: "The point of recycling isnt to save money. By recycling, we keep thousands of tons of materials out of our landfills, which mean we can use the same landfills longer. Its about conserving our resources, not about saving money on trash pickup."Laurens response to Sarah serves toa)Support Sarah’s contention that recycling is too expensive.b)Refute Sarah’s argument that recycling is more expensive than taking trash to the landfill.c)Suggest to Sarah that there is an alternate view of why recycling makes good sense for the people of their city.d)Points to a fundamental value difference between the two when it comes to conservation.e)Points out her ignorance of municipal finances.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
Sarah: "I dont understand why you recycle so much. The recycling program costs the city several million dollars a year. Trash disposal at the landfill costs half as much per household than the municipal recycling program. It just doesnt seem cost effective to have a recycling program."Lauren: "The point of recycling isnt to save money. By recycling, we keep thousands of tons of materials out of our landfills, which mean we can use the same landfills longer. Its about conserving our resources, not about saving money on trash pickup."Laurens response to Sarah serves toa)Support Sarah’s contention that recycling is too expensive.b)Refute Sarah’s argument that recycling is more expensive than taking trash to the landfill.c)Suggest to Sarah that there is an alternate view of why recycling makes good sense for the people of their city.d)Points to a fundamental value difference between the two when it comes to conservation.e)Points out her ignorance of municipal finances.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for GMAT 2025 is part of GMAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the GMAT exam syllabus. Information about Sarah: "I dont understand why you recycle so much. The recycling program costs the city several million dollars a year. Trash disposal at the landfill costs half as much per household than the municipal recycling program. It just doesnt seem cost effective to have a recycling program."Lauren: "The point of recycling isnt to save money. By recycling, we keep thousands of tons of materials out of our landfills, which mean we can use the same landfills longer. Its about conserving our resources, not about saving money on trash pickup."Laurens response to Sarah serves toa)Support Sarah’s contention that recycling is too expensive.b)Refute Sarah’s argument that recycling is more expensive than taking trash to the landfill.c)Suggest to Sarah that there is an alternate view of why recycling makes good sense for the people of their city.d)Points to a fundamental value difference between the two when it comes to conservation.e)Points out her ignorance of municipal finances.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for GMAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Sarah: "I dont understand why you recycle so much. The recycling program costs the city several million dollars a year. Trash disposal at the landfill costs half as much per household than the municipal recycling program. It just doesnt seem cost effective to have a recycling program."Lauren: "The point of recycling isnt to save money. By recycling, we keep thousands of tons of materials out of our landfills, which mean we can use the same landfills longer. Its about conserving our resources, not about saving money on trash pickup."Laurens response to Sarah serves toa)Support Sarah’s contention that recycling is too expensive.b)Refute Sarah’s argument that recycling is more expensive than taking trash to the landfill.c)Suggest to Sarah that there is an alternate view of why recycling makes good sense for the people of their city.d)Points to a fundamental value difference between the two when it comes to conservation.e)Points out her ignorance of municipal finances.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Sarah: "I dont understand why you recycle so much. The recycling program costs the city several million dollars a year. Trash disposal at the landfill costs half as much per household than the municipal recycling program. It just doesnt seem cost effective to have a recycling program."Lauren: "The point of recycling isnt to save money. By recycling, we keep thousands of tons of materials out of our landfills, which mean we can use the same landfills longer. Its about conserving our resources, not about saving money on trash pickup."Laurens response to Sarah serves toa)Support Sarah’s contention that recycling is too expensive.b)Refute Sarah’s argument that recycling is more expensive than taking trash to the landfill.c)Suggest to Sarah that there is an alternate view of why recycling makes good sense for the people of their city.d)Points to a fundamental value difference between the two when it comes to conservation.e)Points out her ignorance of municipal finances.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for GMAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for GMAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Sarah: "I dont understand why you recycle so much. The recycling program costs the city several million dollars a year. Trash disposal at the landfill costs half as much per household than the municipal recycling program. It just doesnt seem cost effective to have a recycling program."Lauren: "The point of recycling isnt to save money. By recycling, we keep thousands of tons of materials out of our landfills, which mean we can use the same landfills longer. Its about conserving our resources, not about saving money on trash pickup."Laurens response to Sarah serves toa)Support Sarah’s contention that recycling is too expensive.b)Refute Sarah’s argument that recycling is more expensive than taking trash to the landfill.c)Suggest to Sarah that there is an alternate view of why recycling makes good sense for the people of their city.d)Points to a fundamental value difference between the two when it comes to conservation.e)Points out her ignorance of municipal finances.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Sarah: "I dont understand why you recycle so much. The recycling program costs the city several million dollars a year. Trash disposal at the landfill costs half as much per household than the municipal recycling program. It just doesnt seem cost effective to have a recycling program."Lauren: "The point of recycling isnt to save money. By recycling, we keep thousands of tons of materials out of our landfills, which mean we can use the same landfills longer. Its about conserving our resources, not about saving money on trash pickup."Laurens response to Sarah serves toa)Support Sarah’s contention that recycling is too expensive.b)Refute Sarah’s argument that recycling is more expensive than taking trash to the landfill.c)Suggest to Sarah that there is an alternate view of why recycling makes good sense for the people of their city.d)Points to a fundamental value difference between the two when it comes to conservation.e)Points out her ignorance of municipal finances.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Sarah: "I dont understand why you recycle so much. The recycling program costs the city several million dollars a year. Trash disposal at the landfill costs half as much per household than the municipal recycling program. It just doesnt seem cost effective to have a recycling program."Lauren: "The point of recycling isnt to save money. By recycling, we keep thousands of tons of materials out of our landfills, which mean we can use the same landfills longer. Its about conserving our resources, not about saving money on trash pickup."Laurens response to Sarah serves toa)Support Sarah’s contention that recycling is too expensive.b)Refute Sarah’s argument that recycling is more expensive than taking trash to the landfill.c)Suggest to Sarah that there is an alternate view of why recycling makes good sense for the people of their city.d)Points to a fundamental value difference between the two when it comes to conservation.e)Points out her ignorance of municipal finances.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Sarah: "I dont understand why you recycle so much. The recycling program costs the city several million dollars a year. Trash disposal at the landfill costs half as much per household than the municipal recycling program. It just doesnt seem cost effective to have a recycling program."Lauren: "The point of recycling isnt to save money. By recycling, we keep thousands of tons of materials out of our landfills, which mean we can use the same landfills longer. Its about conserving our resources, not about saving money on trash pickup."Laurens response to Sarah serves toa)Support Sarah’s contention that recycling is too expensive.b)Refute Sarah’s argument that recycling is more expensive than taking trash to the landfill.c)Suggest to Sarah that there is an alternate view of why recycling makes good sense for the people of their city.d)Points to a fundamental value difference between the two when it comes to conservation.e)Points out her ignorance of municipal finances.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Sarah: "I dont understand why you recycle so much. The recycling program costs the city several million dollars a year. Trash disposal at the landfill costs half as much per household than the municipal recycling program. It just doesnt seem cost effective to have a recycling program."Lauren: "The point of recycling isnt to save money. By recycling, we keep thousands of tons of materials out of our landfills, which mean we can use the same landfills longer. Its about conserving our resources, not about saving money on trash pickup."Laurens response to Sarah serves toa)Support Sarah’s contention that recycling is too expensive.b)Refute Sarah’s argument that recycling is more expensive than taking trash to the landfill.c)Suggest to Sarah that there is an alternate view of why recycling makes good sense for the people of their city.d)Points to a fundamental value difference between the two when it comes to conservation.e)Points out her ignorance of municipal finances.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice GMAT tests.

Explore Courses for GMAT exam