OG Verbal Review #56

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 168
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:48 pm
Thanked: 6 times

OG Verbal Review #56

by punitkaur » Thu Nov 05, 2009 11:02 am
Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both grain and meat. However, as per capita income in Gortland has risen toward the world average, per capita consumption of meat has also risen toward the world average, and it takes several pounds of grain to produce one pound of meat. Therefore, since per capita income continues to rise, whereas domestic grain production will not increase, Gortland will soon have to import either grain or meat or both.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
(A) The total acreage devoted to grain production in Gortland will not decrease substantially.
(B) The population of Gortland has remained relatively constant during the country's years of growing prosperity.
(C) The per capita consumption of meat in Gortland is roughly the same across all income levels.
(D) In Gortland, neither meat nor grain is subject to government price controls.
(E) People in Gortland who increase their consumption of meat will not radically decrease their consumption of grain.

How would one approach this question. How to identify which answers have scope shift?
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 344
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 5:40 am
Thanked: 28 times
Followed by:3 members
GMAT Score:700

by sunnyjohn » Thu Nov 05, 2009 7:19 pm
IMO: E

Try to negate the things:

if they increase the consumption of meat --> consumption of grain will go down

Means --> they dont need to import anything.

conclusion is falling apart.