BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Teenager question 1000 CR Test 1 - 8

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 41
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 7:34 am
Thanked: 2 times
Followed by:1 members

Teenager question 1000 CR Test 1 - 8

by Warlock007 » Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:27 am
Hey folks
please help me with your answers ans explanations
might be silly one but still i would appreciate your help


Teenagers are often priced out of the labor market by the government-mandated minimum-wage level because employers cannot afford to pay that much for extra help. Therefore, if Congress institutes a sub-minimum wage, a new lower legal wage for teenagers, the teenage unemployment rate, which has been rising since 1960, will no longer increase.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument above?

(A) Since 1960 the teenage unemployment rate has risen when the minimum wage has risen.
(B) Since 1960 the teenage unemployment rate has risen even when the minimum wage remained constant.
(C) Employers often hire extra help during holiday and warm weather seasons.
(D) The teenage unemployment rate rose more quickly in the 1970's than it did in the 1960's.
(E) The teenage unemployment rate has occasionally declined in the years since 1960.

OAB
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Legendary Member
Posts: 1578
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 1:49 am
Thanked: 82 times
Followed by:9 members
GMAT Score:720

by maihuna » Fri Jan 28, 2011 12:40 pm
I think its a tough call on B. Though it serves the purpose. Argument mentions that reducing min wage will help not increase youth unemp. B mentions that even when wage are fixed the unemployment has risen, it means there is something different than wage that causes actual unemp rise.
Charged up again to beat the beast :)
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 219
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 8:51 pm
Thanked: 62 times
Followed by:5 members
GMAT Score:750

by fitzgerald23 » Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:23 pm
1. Teenagers are unemployed because of the minimum wage
2. A subminimum wage for teens would stop the rising teenage unemployment rate from continuing to increase.

The question wants you to find a reason why the conclusion will no be valid

A. Incorrect. If unemployment has risen when wages rise it does mean there is a direct correlation between wages and employment. Thus a reduction should no longer increase the rate.

B. Correct. This calls the conclusion into doubt. The conclusion is based on the authors belief that the minimum wage is what is forcing people to not hire teens. If the wage is not rising but the unemployment rate still is then there must be another fact causing the rate to increase. If this is the case a subminimum wage may not stop the unemplyment rate from increasing.

C. Incorrect. This has no bearing on the conclusion.

D. Incorrect. We dont care about the rate of increase, we need to find a way to tie the rate in with the minimum wage.

E. Incorrect. This does not tell us why the rate declined or rose. Were there years when the decline was due to wage freezes? This doesnt give us the necessary info
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1