IMO A (economic (Homeless + Personel (traveling abroad)))

but still skeptical as the A says: both....and(rather than or)

IMO C

Conclusion: However, the basic statistical portrait of the nation painted by the census is accurate.

According to the information, in spite some of the poor and the rich go uncounted, the basic statistical portrait is accurate.

C: Suppose there are 60 rich and 40 poor in the population.

For instance 10% rich go uncounted i.e. 6 of them and that 10% poor go uncounted ie. 4 of them.

So the total number of uncounted people - 10/100 - 10%.

Hence you are not over representing any group or double counting any group. So only if the percentage of uncounted poor and uncounted rich is equal will the statistics be accurate.

Negate it

60 -rich, 40 - poor

10% rich go uncounted - 6
20% poor go uncounted - 8
total - 14/100 - 14%. In this case the statistics is not accurate.

A: Out of Scope. We are not interested in why some people from these groups go uncounted.

B: Out of Scope.

D: This is a shell game trap. We are discussing uncounted poor Americans and uncounted Rich Americans.
This option discusses all the homeless Americans and rich Americans.

E: Out of Scope. The primary purpose of the census is not discussed.

crazy4gmat wrote: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.

C defintely..If you negate it, Conclusion will fall apart

Agree with mal24 ...it should be C

"D: This is a shell game trap. We are discussing uncounted poor Americans and uncounted Rich Americans.
This option discusses all the homeless Americans and rich Americans. "

Thanks Mals24 for this.. I was wondering why the OA was not D..

You're welcome.

Be very careful of shell game traps. They are one of the most trickiest options.

C it should be

Can someone explain why B is irrelevant/out of scope here?
I understand C is a better choice (as explained by mals24), but IMO B can be an assumption as well. For the statistics to be correct, the argument classifies people as poor or rich only.

Opinions please...

mals24 wrote:IMO C

Conclusion: However, the basic statistical portrait of the nation painted by the census is accurate.

According to the information, in spite some of the poor and the rich go uncounted, the basic statistical portrait is accurate.

C: Suppose there are 60 rich and 40 poor in the population.

For instance 10% rich go uncounted i.e. 6 of them and that 10% poor go uncounted ie. 4 of them.

So the total number of uncounted people - 10/100 - 10%.

Hence you are not over representing any group or double counting any group. So only if the percentage of uncounted poor and uncounted rich is equal will the statistics be accurate.

Negate it

60 -rich, 40 - poor

10% rich go uncounted - 6
20% poor go uncounted - 8
total - 14/100 - 14%. In this case the statistics is not accurate.

A: Out of Scope. We are not interested in why some people from these groups go uncounted.

B: Out of Scope.

D: This is a shell game trap. We are discussing uncounted poor Americans and uncounted Rich Americans.
This option discusses all the homeless Americans and rich Americans.

E: Out of Scope. The primary purpose of the census is not discussed.

I think it's not just about being the shell game answer. It's also about statistical part of the argument. Let's say there are 100 homeless and 100 rich (people) who weren't counted in the census. If, however, there are really only 400 actual homeless but 40000 rich, the census may paint a different picture for the homeless category.
Let me know where I am going wrong.

IMO B.

conclusion :

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

negate B and the conclusion above will fall apart.

C :

The percentage of poor Americans uncounted by the census is close to the percentage of rich Americans uncounted.

language is not clear to me. Whether the percentage is for total population or percentage of the Poor/rich.

crazy4gmat wrote: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.

I would go with B. The argument assumes that all Americans are either poor or rich. If we remove this the conclusion falls apart.

OA plz......

If (B) is correct the arg shd fall apart if it is negated i.e "All Americans may NOT reasonably be classified as either poor or rich". but the arg is still valid bcz it only looks at the Americans that ARE poor or rich.

Hi crazy4gmat,

What's the OA?