1000CR - TestA#7,Test B#15,19

[Priti]

TEST A
7. If A, then B.
If B, then C.
If C, then D.
If all of the statements above are true, which of the following must also be true?
(A) If D, then A.
(B) If not B, then not C.
(C) If not D, then not A.
(D) If D, then E.
(E) If not A, then not D.


TESTB
15. In the effort to fire a Civil Service employee, his or her manager may have to spend up to $100,000 of tax money. Since Civil Service employees know how hard it is to fire them, they tend to loaf. This explains in large part why the government is so inefficient.
It can be properly inferred on the basis of the statements above that the author believes which of the following?
I. Too much job security can have a negative influence on workers.
II. More government workers should be fired.
III. Most government workers are Civil Service employees.
(A) I only
(B) I and III only
(C) II only7. If A, then B.
(D) I, II, and III
(E) III only




19. The U.S. census is not perfect: thousands of Americans probably go uncounted. However, the basic statistical portrait of the nation painted by the census is accurate. Certainly some of the poor go uncounted, particularly the homeless; but some of the rich go uncounted as well, because they are often abroad or traveling between one residence and another.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument above depends?
(A) Both the rich and the poor have personal and economic reasons to avoid being counted by the census.
(B) All Americans may reasonably be classified as either poor or rich.
(C) The percentage of poor Americans uncounted by the census is close to the percentage of rich Americans uncounted.
(D) The number of homeless Americans is approximately equal to the number of rich Americans.
(E) The primary purpose of the census is to analyze the economic status of the American population.


Correct ans --
7.c
15. c
19. c

My guess would have been

7.B
15.E
19. B (for sure)


Can someone pl. explain it briefly...

Thanks a lot.
Priti

[800guy]

19. The U.S. census is not perfect: thousands of Americans probably go uncounted. However, the basic statistical portrait of the nation painted by the census is accurate. Certainly some of the poor go uncounted, particularly the homeless; but some of the rich go uncounted as well, because they are often abroad or traveling between one residence and another.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument above depends?
(A) Both the rich and the poor have personal and economic reasons to avoid being counted by the census.
(B) All Americans may reasonably be classified as either poor or rich.
(C) The percentage of poor Americans uncounted by the census is close to the percentage of rich Americans uncounted.
(D) The number of homeless Americans is approximately equal to the number of rich Americans.
(E) The primary purpose of the census is to analyze the economic status of the American population.

hard freakin' questions!! here's what i got for #19:

(A) - i think this is a true statement, but it doesn't say anything about creating an accurate 'statistical portrait' - REJECT
(B) - not releveant - REJECT
(C) - this is the right answer because it explains the logic of how the uncounted on both ends of the spectrum wash each other out to create an accurate statistical portrait - ACCEPT
(D) - not quite--we don't know how this assumption leads to the statistical portrait - REJECT
(E) - not relevant - REJECT

C it is

[kulksnikhil]

TESTB
15. In the effort to fire a Civil Service employee, his or her manager may have to spend up to $100,000 of tax money. Since Civil Service employees know how hard it is to fire them, they tend to loaf. This explains in large part why the government is so inefficient.
It can be properly inferred on the basis of the statements above that the author believes which of the following?
I. Too much job security can have a negative influence on workers.
II. More government workers should be fired.
III. Most government workers are Civil Service employees.
(A) I only
(B) I and III only
(C) II only7. If A, then B.
(D) I, II, and III
(E) III only

I would say answer is A) I only

[rajs.kumar]

TEST A
7. If A, then B.
If B, then C.
If C, then D.
If all of the statements above are true, which of the following must also be true?
(A) If D, then A.
(B) If not B, then not C.
(C) If not D, then not A.
(D) If D, then E.
(E) If not A, then not D


19. The U.S. census is not perfect: thousands of Americans probably go uncounted. However, the basic statistical portrait of the nation painted by the census is accurate. Certainly some of the poor go uncounted, particularly the homeless; but some of the rich go uncounted as well, because they are often abroad or traveling between one residence and another.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument above depends?
(A) Both the rich and the poor have personal and economic reasons to avoid being counted by the census.
(B) All Americans may reasonably be classified as either poor or rich.
(C) The percentage of poor Americans uncounted by the census is close to the percentage of rich Americans uncounted.
(D) The number of homeless Americans is approximately equal to the number of rich Americans.
(E) The primary purpose of the census is to analyze the economic status of the American population.


Thanks a lot.
Priti

7. A -> B -> C -> D

If not D means C is not present. According to the stem only C can cause D, which implies absence of D will indicate absence of C. Using the same logic we can conclude if not D then not A.

Answer is C

19. I agree with 800guy and OA. Answer is C.

"the basic statistical portrait of the nation painted by the census is accurate"

If the census has to be statistically correct, then the precentage of poor left out should be equal to percentage of rich left out by the census.

[kulksnikhil]

TEST A
7. If A, then B.
If B, then C.
If C, then D.
If all of the statements above are true, which of the following must also be true?
(A) If D, then A.
(B) If not B, then not C.
(C) If not D, then not A.
(D) If D, then E.
(E) If not A, then not D


7. A -> B -> C -> D

If not D means C is not present. According to the stem only C can cause D, which implies absence of D will indicate absence of C. Using the same logic we can conclude if not D then not A.

Answer is C

But then, applying the same logic, A, B or E also sound to be true.

A-> D is there means C is there, C is there means, B is there, B is there means A is there.

B> If B is not there then C cannot be there

E> Without A , B cannot be there... So C cannot be there, so D cannot be there

[rajs.kumar]

TEST A
7. If A, then B.
If B, then C.
If C, then D.
If all of the statements above are true, which of the following must also be true?
(A) If D, then A.
(B) If not B, then not C.
(C) If not D, then not A.
(D) If D, then E.
(E) If not A, then not D


7. A -> B -> C -> D

If not D means C is not present. According to the stem only C can cause D, which implies absence of D will indicate absence of C. Using the same logic we can conclude if not D then not A.

Answer is C

But then, applying the same logic, A, B or E also sound to be true.

A-> D is there means C is there, C is there means, B is there, B is there means A is there.

B> If B is not there then C cannot be there

E> Without A , B cannot be there... So C cannot be there, so D cannot be there

You are right there seems to be a flaw in my reasoning.

[800guy]

sheesh, that test a problem is a pain in the butt!!

[aim-wsc]

stacey need your help at this thread also.

[venkat8103]

I'll go with
C
A
A

Erin/Bob/any expert,

Please lookin to this thread and explain whats correct.

[Stacey Koprince]

Hey, guys, lots of discussion on these!

I go through the questions below, but I want to point something out about the middle question. If the OA is really C, as the initial poster said, then don't use this source anymore. If C is the claimed answer, then this question is bad enough that I wouldn't trust whatever else this source writes.

7.
For any "If, Then" statement, we can only conclude two things. The basic "If, Then" statement given is true, and the converse of the statement is true.

So, for example, given If A, Then B, we can also say, If NOT B, Then NOT A. That's all we can say for certain.

So, if we have the string given in this question:
If A, then B.
If B, then C.
If C, then D.

We can follow the statements to conclude "If A, then D" And the only thing we can draw from that statement is "If Not D, then Not A."

Answer C is correct.

Test B
I. Okay. We could infer this in the real world (but the test doesn't tend to infer this way).
II. False. Nothing supports this statement - takes it too far.
III. False. Nothing supports this statement.

Only Answer A is reasonable. However, statement I does not infer in the way the official test infers. I can tell this isn't an official question. If the "official answer" for this one is A, it's not great, but not horrible either. If the "official answer" for this one is C (which I think you said in your original post), then IGNORE THIS QUESTION and consider whether you want to continue to use this source. Statement II absolutely cannot be properly inferred here.

19.
Not a wonderful question, but not totally wrong / inaccurate like the last one. Author claims the basic statistical portrait is accurate. Premise is that, even though some poor go uncounted, some rich go uncounted as well. There are many things wrong with this overall, but one of the assumptions this person is making is that there's some kind of correlation between the uncounted poor and the uncounted rich (in order for the overall portrait to be statistically accurate). Of course, just a correlation between poor and rich wouldn't get rid of valid complaints about the statistically accurate claim, but we'll ignore that for now.

A. Irrelevant to the argument. It's not about whether the people want to be counted. It's whether they actually get counted in a statistically representative way.

B. Totally irrelevant / ridiculous statement.

C. this basically says there's some kind of correlation between uncounted poor and uncounted rich. Fine.

D. Irrelevant. This says there's a correlation between poor and rich, but that's not what we want. We want uncounted poor and uncounted rich.

E. Irrelevant. Doesn't address the claim of this argument.

Best answer C.

[aim-wsc]

Ha ha
these days, I am searching for the problems, presented in 1000 SC document that have wrong OA.

thanks for the explanation Stacey

[amitamit2020]

when it is given that
P1 : civic service persons are lofty
P2 : It largely explains govt's eneffiicnecy

why can't we infere that Govt. has many civil service persons.i.e. statement - III?

Pl. help me understand ... thanks in advance.

[isisalaska]

I have the same question for # 19, is not in infering too much that the number of poor Americans is close to the number of rich Americans?

[Stacey Koprince]

for the civil service question: "most" means more than 50%. There's nothing in here to allow us to assume that more than 50% of all gov't workers are civil servants. Civil servants might be the biggest part of the explanation as to why the gov't is inefficient, but that doesn't automatically mean that more than 50% of all gov't employees are civil servants. Take the extreme scenario: we could have 49% civil servants who do absolutely nothing all day long. That would make the gov't extremely inefficient... but "most" employees would not be civil servants.

for the census question: this argument is not making an assumption about the number of poor Americans to the number of rich Americans, but rather to the number of UNCOUNTED poor Americans to the number of UNCOUNTED rich Americans. It basically says that it's okay that we don't count some number of poor Americans because we probably don't count a similar number of rich Americans.

If I say that there are an equal number of homeless and rich, that doesn't address the argument b/c (again, taking the extreme scenario), if I have 100 of each, and I could all 100 of the rich Americans and 0 of the homeless Americans, then I haven't balanced the two groups out (in terms of not counting the same amount in each).

[krishnakumarhod]

Hey, guys, lots of discussion on these!



19.
Not a wonderful question, but not totally wrong / inaccurate like the last one. Author claims the basic statistical portrait is accurate. Premise is that, even though some poor go uncounted, some rich go uncounted as well. There are many things wrong with this overall, but one of the assumptions this person is making is that there's some kind of correlation between the uncounted poor and the uncounted rich (in order for the overall portrait to be statistically accurate). Of course, just a correlation between poor and rich wouldn't get rid of valid complaints about the statistically accurate claim, but we'll ignore that for now.

A. Irrelevant to the argument. It's not about whether the people want to be counted. It's whether they actually get counted in a statistically representative way.

B. Totally irrelevant / ridiculous statement.

C. this basically says there's some kind of correlation between uncounted poor and uncounted rich. Fine.

D. Irrelevant. This says there's a correlation between poor and rich, but that's not what we want. We want uncounted poor and uncounted rich.

E. Irrelevant. Doesn't address the claim of this argument.

Best answer C.

I really dont understand how B is irrelavant .The argument says "thousands of Americans probably go uncounted" and tells us only about rich and poor unaccounted.What if there is some middle class segment some of them also goes unaccounted then again the portrait is not correct rt?