OG 87

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 447
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 7:13 am
Thanked: 46 times
Followed by:13 members
GMAT Score:700

OG 87

by hemant_rajput » Mon May 20, 2013 8:41 pm
87. In the United States, of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired, the percentage
who retired to Florida has decreased by three percentage points over the past ten years. Since many local
businesses in Florida cater to retirees, these declines are likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect
on these businesses and therefore on the economy of Florida.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument given?
(A) People who moved from one state to another when they retired moved a greater distance, on average, last year than such people did ten years ago.
(B) People were more likely to retire to North Carolina from another state last year than people were ten years ago.
(C) The number of people who moved from one state to another when they retired has increased significantly over the past ten years.
(D) The number of people who left Florida when they retired to live in another state was greater last year than it was ten years ago.
(E) Florida attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state.


Can someone please explain me what actually this passage is saying? I'm having hard time comprehending the passage.
I'm no expert, just trying to work on my skills. If I've made any mistakes please bear with me.
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2013 3:09 am
Thanked: 6 times

by Nachiket » Tue May 21, 2013 2:15 am
hemant_rajput wrote:87. In the United States, of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired, the percentage
who retired to Florida has decreased by three percentage points over the past ten years. Since many local
businesses in Florida cater to retirees, these declines are likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect
on these businesses and therefore on the economy of Florida.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument given?
(A) People who moved from one state to another when they retired moved a greater distance, on average, last year than such people did ten years ago.
(B) People were more likely to retire to North Carolina from another state last year than people were ten years ago.
(C) The number of people who moved from one state to another when they retired has increased significantly over the past ten years.
(D) The number of people who left Florida when they retired to live in another state was greater last year than it was ten years ago.
(E) Florida attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state.


Can someone please explain me what actually this passage is saying? I'm having hard time comprehending the passage.
It says :-

The percentage of total retired population who are moving from one state to another, those who are moving to Florida after retirement has decreased by three percentage points over the past ten years. Now since many businesses in Florida cater to these retired population, so these businesses are impacted because fewer retired ppl are moving to Florida and hence impacting its overall economy.

Let me know in case you need any further clarification !!
Stay Hungry , Stay Foolish !!

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 15539
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: New York, NY
Thanked: 13060 times
Followed by:1906 members
GMAT Score:790

by GMATGuruNY » Wed May 22, 2013 4:31 am
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 104
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 10:23 pm
Thanked: 36 times
Followed by:4 members

by fcabanski » Tue May 28, 2013 1:32 am
Anticipate an answer.

Some number of people who retire move to another state when they retire. Call them moving retirees. The % of moving retirees who moved to FL decreased by 3% over the last 10 years. That caused problems for businesses (those that cater to retirees). Those businesses now have fewer customers.

Argument in the paragraph: A decrease in the % of moving retirees who move to FL hurts businesses that cater to retirees.



What would weaken that argument?

Disputing the cause would weaken the argument. But disputing that fewer moving retirees move to FL would destroy the argument completely.

(A) People who moved from one state to another when they retired moved a greater distance, on average, last year than such people did ten years ago.

Did they also wear hats? Wearing hats matters as much as how far they traveled. This doesn't affect the argument.

(B) People were more likely to retire to North Carolina from another state last year than people were ten years ago.

We're talking about FL businesses. This is nice to know. But no effect.


(C) The number of people who moved from one state to another when they retired has increased significantly over the past ten years.

Ah ha! This destroys the argument. Businesses are booming, because there are more retirees entering FL. Example, if there were 1000 moving retirees, and the % that moved to FL decreased from 10% to 7%, that would be a drop from 100 to 70. But if over the same period the number of moving retirees increased to 10,000, there would be a rise in total number moving to FL from 100 (10% of 1000) to 700 (7% of 10000).

(D) The number of people who left Florida when they retired to live in another state was greater last year than it was ten years ago.

This weakens the cause side of the argument. Retirees are leaving FL too, so it isn't just that fewer moving retirees move to FL that is hurting businesses. But the businesses are still hurting.

(E) Florida attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state.

So? If the % is going down, that's still bad.

D weakens the argument.

C destroys the argument. The answer is C.
Expert GMAT tutor.
[email protected]

If you find one of my answers helpful, please click thank.

Contact me to discuss online GMAT tutoring.