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.

Percentage of their income that single persons spent

Expert replies
by madhukumar_v » Tue Apr 20, 2010 11:05 am
Thirty years ago, the percentage of their income that single persons spent on food was twice what it is today. Given that incomes have risen over the past thirty years, we can conclude that incomes have risen at a greater rate than the price of food in that period.
Which one of the following, if assumed, helps most to justify the conclusion drawn above?

1. The amount of food eaten per capita today is identical to the amount of food eaten per capita thirty years ago.

2. In general, single persons today eat healthier foods and eat less than their counterparts of thirty years ago

3. Single persons today, on average, purchase the same kinds of food items in the same quantities as they did thirty years ago.

4. The prices of nonfood items single person purchase have risen faster than the price of food over the past thirty years

5. Unlike single persons, families today spend about the same percentage of their income on food as they did thirty years ago.

Please explain. Appreciate your time.

OA : 3
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by reply2spg » Tue Apr 20, 2010 5:34 pm
C is correct here....all other are irrelevant
madhukumar_v wrote:Thirty years ago, the percentage of their income that single persons spent on food was twice what it is today. Given that incomes have risen over the past thirty years, we can conclude that incomes have risen at a greater rate than the price of food in that period.
Which one of the following, if assumed, helps most to justify the conclusion drawn above?

1. The amount of food eaten per capita today is identical to the amount of food eaten per capita thirty years ago.

2. In general, single persons today eat healthier foods and eat less than their counterparts of thirty years ago

3. Single persons today, on average, purchase the same kinds of food items in the same quantities as they did thirty years ago.

4. The prices of nonfood items single person purchase have risen faster than the price of food over the past thirty years

5. Unlike single persons, families today spend about the same percentage of their income on food as they did thirty years ago.

Please explain. Appreciate your time.

OA : 3
Join the discussion

by Domnu » Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:58 pm
IMO, the answer is C

[spoiler]A: I initially chose this, but this isn't right, since this doesn't give us any information on prices.
B: Healthiness isn't mentioned anywhere.
C: Makes sense... if the same food items in the same quantities are purchased, these variables are held while the years change. We can make deductions about prices then.
D: Nonfood items are out of scope.
E: This would weaken, and not strengthen the conclusion.[/spoiler]
Have you wondered how you could have found such a treasure? -T
Join the discussion

by tpr-becky » Wed Apr 21, 2010 10:03 pm
1. doesn't address the issue of cost
2. still doesn't address cost
3 because the argument is about percent of income (not dollar amount) it is always important to know that nothing else has changed other than the cost so this is relevant.
4. this deals with cost of nonfood - irrelevant.
5. the argument is about single people, not families so this is also irrelevant.
Becky
Master GMAT Instructor
The Princeton Review
Irvine, CA
Join the discussion