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

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0563 reviews
Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026 winner: Target Test Prep, #1 Test Prep
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE AWARDS 2026

Target Test Prep was voted #1 Best Test Prep in the 2026 Newsweek Readers’ Choice™ Awards.

GMATLiveTeach Starts Oct 17
Chris Peckover, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Chris Peckover, 100th-Percentile GMAT Scorer

Oct 17 · Chris Peckover
Sat · 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM ET
Oct 20 · Chris Peckover
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Oct 25 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 1:00 to 4:00 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Attend the first class for free
  • Every class is recorded, so you never fall behind
View classes & enroll
Limited seats availableTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeachOnDemand 5 seats left Start anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll Start free 5-day trial
Limited cohort · enrollment openTrial includes full course accessTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Florida cater business!

Expert replies
by gmat_perfect » Tue Aug 31, 2010 11:14 am
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, this decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) Florida attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state.
(B) The number of people who move out of Florida to accept employment in other states has increased over the past ten years.
(C) There are far more local businesses in Florida that cater to tourists than there are local businesses that cater to retirees.
(D) The total number of people who retired and moved to another state for their retirement has increased significantly over the past ten years.
(E) 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.

[spoiler]OA: D[/spoiler]

I was thinking about A.

If A is true, then Florida can attract more people means of all the states, Florida will attract more retired persons.
Example:
100 persons moved. if out of this 100 Florida can attract 40 persons, all other states can attract only 60. This means that Florida will have more people.

What is the flaw in my reasoning?

Thanks.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by kvcpk » Tue Aug 31, 2010 11:44 am
Let me put across 2 scenarios:

Supporting OA D.

Let the number of retirees moving from one state to another ten years ago = 100
Number of retirees to florida ten years ago = 20
Percentage = 20 %

Let the number of retirees moving from one state at present = 1000
Number of retirees to florida at present = 170
Percentage = 17 %

Percentage drop is 3%. But the businesses actually increased.
Hence D weakens the argument.


Contradicting A:
Let the number of retirees moving from one state to another ten years ago = 100
Number of retirees to florida ten years ago = 20
Assume total 100 states. Which means As per A, remaining 99 states, each, are not attracting more than 20.
Percentage = 20 %

Let the number of retirees moving from one state to another at present = 100
Number of retirees to florida at present = 17
Assume total 100 states. Which means As per A, remaining 99 states, each, are not attracting more than 17.
Percentage = 17 %

percentage decreased, Business also decreased. Hence A doesnt clearly help out in weakening.

Hope this helps!!
"Once you start working on something,
don't be afraid of failure and don't abandon it.
People who work sincerely are the happiest."
Chanakya quotes (Indian politician, strategist and writer, 350 BC-275BC)
Join the discussion

by uwhusky » Tue Aug 31, 2010 11:46 am
Hey gmat_perfect, I have noticed a common flaw you make when it comes to CR questions. You are often caught up with facts or what I considered labels that are not relevant to the argument.

For example with this question, whether Florida attracts more retirees than any other state has no effect on the argument. The argument is concerned with the drop in percentage with the assumption that the percentage reflects actual number, and the number can be very big or very small, but the size of the number doesn't matter, because the concern is with the difference in number between 10 years ago and today.

Let's use your example and I'll try to put it in the context; Florida businesses cater to a retiree population of 100 people, and A says that this group of 100 people is the largest group out of all the states. Can you see how it doesn't affect the argument?
Join the discussion