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.

Las Vegas population

Expert replies
by vishugogo » Mon Jul 08, 2013 4:33 am
Over the last three years, the city of Las Vegas has grown in population at a rate of six percent per year. Over the same period of time, however, water usage inside the city of Las Vegas is down almost fifteen percent.

Each of the following, if true, could help to explain the simultaneous decline in water usage and increase in population in Las Vegas, EXCEPT:

A)Due to drought awareness campaigns, the average citizen in Las Vegas now uses almost thirty percent less water now than he or she did three years ago.

B)Two years ago, the city instituted a popular new incentive program for citizens to tear out high water consuming lawns and replace them with low water consuming desert landscaping.

C)The city council has proposed a moratorium on the construction of high water consuming golf courses starting in two years.

D)Three years ago a mining company that consumed vast amounts of water operated within the city limits; now that company is out of business.

E)The mayor ordered that all of the city's hundreds of fountains be shut off, reducing water use due to evaporation considerably.

I was able to point out the correct option C

But I am confused by the fact that the question is explain type....and the answer to that will always explain both sides of the paradox....no options seems to correct this fact rather only explains one side of the argument.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by dumbest » Mon Jul 08, 2013 7:12 am
You don't need an explaination for both - why population rose & why water usage declined. All you need is a link between the two. A,B,D,E ,if true, will help to explain the phenomenon.
C doesn't.
Coming Soon!!
Join the discussion

by [email protected] » Mon Jul 22, 2013 5:41 am
Each of the following, if true, could help to explain the simultaneous decline in water usage and increase in population in Las Vegas, EXCEPT

The question is not asking you to answer how both are individually happening. It is just asking you to Resolve the paradox that why when the population increased, then water is decreasing. It is naturally assuming the two things.
Join the discussion

by David@VeritasPrep » Mon Jul 22, 2013 9:02 am
vishugogo -

You have made such a good point!! Most people think that you need to focus on "both sides of the paradox equally" but this is not true. You see, one side of the paradox should be essentially self-explanatory (or well enough explained by the argument) while the other side is the one that needs to be explained.

So in this case, it is self -explanatory that the population has increased - right? Do you need any further information on this?

But we do need to explain why (in light of the increase in population) there has been a decrease in water consumption. So that is how both sides get involved. You need to explain the surprising fact - which has become more surprising due to the other fact. You see on it's own, decreased water usage is not that surprising. But it becomes much more surprising when we consider that the population has increased.

Try this method going forward. Identify the "simple fact" that has been well explained or does not need to be explained and the identify the "surprising fact" that needs an explanation. Focus on the surprising fact when you go to the answer choices. Just remember, it may the be simple fact that has made it so surprising!
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course
Join the discussion