| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
magical cook GMAT Destroyer!
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 484
Thanks given: 6 Thanked 1 times in 1 posts
|
Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 8:54 pm Post subject: 1000 CR test 5 |
|
|
Hi,
The correct answer is A) but it looks to me A) is equivalent to B)... That is, if A) is correct, B) seems correct too. Can anyone explain the difference?
Recent estimates predict that between 1982 and 1995 the greatest increase in the number of people employed will be in the category of low-paying service occupations. This category, however, will not increase its share of total employment, whereas the category of high-paying service occupations will increase its share.
If the estimates above are accurate, which of the following conclusions can be drawn?
(A) In 1982 more people were working in low-paying service occupations than were working in high-paying service occupations.
(B) In 1995 more people will be working in high-paying service occupations than will be working in low-paying service occupations.
(C) Nonservice occupations will account for the same share of total employment in 1995 as in 1982.
(D) Many of the people who were working in low-paying service occupations in 1982 will be working in high-paying service occupations by 1995.
(E) The rate of growth for low-paying service occupations will be greater than the overall rate of employment growth between 1982 and 1995. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
rajesh_ctm Really wants to Beat The GMAT!
Joined: 27 Feb 2007 Posts: 135
Thanks given: 0 Thanked 0 times in 0 posts
|
Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 6:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A and B are not related. Consider the following scenario:
1982 - Total jobs 100 - Low paying - 80, High Paying - 20
1995 - Total jobs 200 - Low paying - 150, High Paying - 50
Increase in Low Paying - 70.
Increase in High Paying - 30.
A is valid, but B is not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
magical cook GMAT Destroyer!
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 484
Thanks given: 6 Thanked 1 times in 1 posts
|
Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 7:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Okay - I now understand the logic. Thanks for great explanation:) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|