Reasoning Aptitude
STATEMENT AND CONCLUSION MCQs
Statement Conclusions And Inferences
Comparison with developed countries can't be inferred from the given statement. Hence I does not follow. The follow up step to be taken by organisations can't be predicted. Hence II does not follow.
I does not follow because we can't extrapolate the conduct of these 142 companies to that of "almost every company". II follows because teaching a lesson to others of the ilk is inherent in any prosection/punishment.
I is a negative course of action.II and III are feasible and also help the banks to reduce their non-performing assets.
As, hawkers are not the only problem, hence I does not follow.As, II is talking about all encroachments, hence it follows.III is not a proper course of action as that is not practically possible.
As the problem is with the poor umpiring decisions, hence "high standing and repute" umpires should be allowed to officiate hence I is proper course of action.II is a negative course of action.III is not possible.
I and II are the proper courses of actions as the terrorist can attack at any place.II is not proper course of action, as this cannot be done immediately.
Here the lack of energy medical facilities.I follows, as it profits the emergency medical facility.II is based on assumption that hospitals does not have such facilities.III is not a proper course of action as that may cause a new problem to the vehicles travelling on roads.
The problem to be solved is to reduce the amount spent on printing documents.Choice (1) is not practically implementable. As the MPs may be at different places or the document may get mutilated when many people handle it.Choice (2) is not implementable as it may not be possible to read the document.Choice (3) is a feasible course of action. Event some cost is involved in providing laptops to all the MPs, this is a one time expenditure. With this the amount spent on printing documents can be reduced to a great extent.Choice (4) has other problems like the MPs may not be able to remember the content of the document.Hence (3) is a feasible course of action.
The statement brings out the reasons behind the government's failure to curtail drug menace.As the people involved are high profile people, it is possible that the efforts of the enforcement authority do not run smoothly. Choice (1) states that the government should increase its support to the enforcement authority. This would help them to perform their duty properly. Hence, (1) is proper course of action.Choice (2) is meaningless as the government does not support selling of drugs at all.Choice (3) is based on the assumption that drug abuse is not declared illegal. Hence, (3) is not a proper course of action.It is meaningless to have meeting with those who are actually involved in illegal activity to discuss about such activity. Hence, (4) is not a proper course of action.Hence, Choice (1) is proper course of action.
It is given that people tend to drive fast on empty and wide roads leading to accidents.Choice (1) suggests narrowing the roads. This may cause problems in the from of traffic jams. This is a short sighted decision because traffic may increase in future.Choice (2) is based on the assumption that speed limits are not displayed. It is a normal practice that speed limits are displayed wherever necessary.Display of photographs may distract the attention of drivers causing more accidents. Hence, (3) is not a proper course of action.Choice (4) does not have immediate impact on the problem.Hence, none of them is a proper course of action.