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.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

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
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget 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.

Government Pensions

Expert replies
by nz11 » Sat Mar 26, 2011 10:53 am
Can anyone provide an explanation of this CR question:


Two years ago, the government of Runagia increased by 20 percent the government-provided pensions paid to Rungians over 65. The aim of the increase was to stimulate the economy in the rural regions of the country, where most pension recipients live. Statistics, however, show that there has been no increase in economic activity in those regions since then, but that there has been noticeably more spending in urban areas.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain why the increase resulted in the unintended state of affairs described?
a) Until the pensions were increased, many Runagians over 65 in rural areas had been receiving support from their children who live in urban areas
b) The pensions were increased when the number of people below the poverty level in rural areas of Runagia reached an all-time high.
c) City-dwellers in Runagia rarely travel to rural regions of the country.
d) The Runagian postal system is so inefficient that it can take up to 3 weeks for pension checks to reach recipients in rural areas.
e) On average, the pensions were higher in rural than in urban areas before the increase.


(answer is D)
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by force5 » Sat Mar 26, 2011 11:56 am
IMO A

If Runagians already received money from their children, they probably spend the same as before the increase in pension. So, there are no increase in spending in rural. At the same time, their children have no need to support their parents so they can spend more in urban.

Choice D is incorrect, as it requires another assumption that Runagians will come to spend in urban to spend as a result of delay of mail delivery.

we always prefer a choice that doesn't involve extra assumption.

Hope that helps!!
Join the discussion

by Tani » Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:13 pm
Agree with force5

Even if checks took two extra weeks, the timing impact would have long since dissipated. WE not only don't know that the pensioners are traveling to the city to spend, we don't know whether they have the option or receiving their pensions in the city. In fact, given the government objective, it is highly unlikely that checks would be sent anywhere other than to the rural addresses.

Imagine if you had been sending a few hundred dollars a month to your aged parents and suddenly they no longer need the money because they get a subsidy from the government. If you were very prudent you might start saving the money you had been sending, but most people are going to spend at least a portion of those freed-up funds on themselves.
Tani Wolff
Join the discussion

by nz11 » Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:39 pm
Thanks! you guys are right. The answer is A, not D. Typo on my part. Great catch on your parts...THANKS!
Join the discussion

by turbo jet » Sun Mar 27, 2011 12:02 am
A: Correct. This option tells us that most Runigians were able to fend themselves by getting support from their children. Thus they may be using the higher pension to save rather than consume. Even if they stop receiving the support from their children, they may consume. In both cases, whether they are receiving or not receiving children support, the level of consumption does not change.

B: This would actually lead to higher consumption. Opposite answer
C: Unrelated
D: So what? Even if pension reaches late, how does it impact consumption. There is no correlation between consumption and postal service.
E: So what?

I tried answering this question by asking myself 'so what'?

Cheers
TJ
Life is Tom; I am Jerry ;)
Join the discussion