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.

Spending on food in the United States

Expert replies
by sumitrajsaxena » Mon May 17, 2010 12:29 am
From 1965 to 1988, spending on food in the United States climbed 46 percent. But over that same period, spending on food to be consumed at home - purchased mainly from supermarkets - grew only 20 percent.
Which of the following statements about the period from 1965 to 1988 in the United States is best supported by the statements above?
(A) Spending on food increased at restaurants and other food retailers that prepare food to be consumed away from home.
(B) Shoppers spent more on certain food products to be consumed at home that are not generally available in supermarkets.
(C) Food prices at supermarkets neither rose nor dropped relative to food prices at other food retailers.
(D There was a decrease in the number of heads households, who tend to spend more than other household members on food consumed away from home.
(E) The number of people who ate at restaurants decreased relative to the number of people who ordered take-out food from restaurants.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by gmat.cracker24 » Mon May 17, 2010 1:23 am
IMO (A)
Join the discussion

by sumitrajsaxena » Mon May 17, 2010 1:31 am
Could you please explain, why B is not correct. Actually I have doubt between A and B.
Join the discussion

by kevincanspain » Mon May 17, 2010 2:19 am
We are told that spending on food to be consumed at home - purchased mainly from supermarkets - grew only 20 percent. We cannot deduce that spending on food to be consumed at home that is not purchased in supermarkets actually rose.


If a + b has increased by 20% (a- spending on home-consumed food purchased at supermarkets b- spending on home-consumed food not purchased at supermarkets), it may well be that b has actually fallen or remained stable.
Kevin Armstrong
GMAT Instructor
Gmatclasses
Madrid
Join the discussion

by neonite » Mon May 17, 2010 3:58 am
kevincanspain wrote:We are told that spending on food to be consumed at home - purchased mainly from supermarkets - grew only 20 percent. We cannot deduce that spending on food to be consumed at home that is not purchased in supermarkets actually rose.


If a + b has increased by 20% (a- spending on home-consumed food purchased at supermarkets b- spending on home-consumed food not purchased at supermarkets), it may well be that b has actually fallen or remained stable.
Going by this logic, we are saying there was 20% growth spending on food to be consumed at home. "Purchased mainly from supermarkets" - tells me that the 20% growth has been from a and b combined.

So, justification for the overall increase of 46% on food spending has to come from choice (A).

Kevin, please let me know if this makes sense.
Join the discussion

by sumitrajsaxena » Mon May 17, 2010 4:35 am
Now got it, thanks a lot.
Join the discussion

by kevincanspain » Mon May 17, 2010 8:28 am
neonite wrote:
kevincanspain wrote:We are told that spending on food to be consumed at home - purchased mainly from supermarkets - grew only 20 percent. We cannot deduce that spending on food to be consumed at home that is not purchased in supermarkets actually rose.


If a + b has increased by 20% (a- spending on home-consumed food purchased at supermarkets b- spending on home-consumed food not purchased at supermarkets), it may well be that b has actually fallen or remained stable.
Going by this logic, we are saying there was 20% growth spending on food to be consumed at home. "Purchased mainly from supermarkets" - tells me that the 20% growth has been from a and b combined.

So, justification for the overall increase of 46% on food spending has to come from choice (A).

Kevin, please let me know if this makes sense.
Great!
Kevin Armstrong
GMAT Instructor
Gmatclasses
Madrid
Join the discussion