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.

teenage unemployment rate

Expert replies
by Ozlemg » Tue Aug 16, 2011 12:16 pm
Teenagers are often priced out of the labor market by the government-mandated minimum-wage level because employers cannot afford to pay that much for extra help. Therefore, if Congress institutes a subminimum wage, a new lower legal wage for teenagers, the teenage unemployment rate, which has been rising since 1960, will no longer increase.
Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument above?

-Since 1960 the teenage unemployment rate has risen when the minimum wage has risen.
-Since 1960 the teenage unemployment rate has risen even when the minimum wage remained constant.
-Employers often hire extra help during holiday and warm weather seasons.
-The teenage unemployment rate rose more quickly in the 1970's than it did in the 1960's.
-The teenage unemployment rate has occasionally declined in the years since 1960.

Why not E?
OA : B
The more you suffer before the test, the less you will do so in the test! :)
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by GmatKiss » Tue Aug 16, 2011 12:25 pm
Ozlemg wrote:Teenagers are often priced out of the labor market by the government-mandated minimum-wage level because employers cannot afford to pay that much for extra help. Therefore, if Congress institutes a subminimum wage, a new lower legal wage for teenagers, the teenage unemployment rate, which has been rising since 1960, will no longer increase.
Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument above?

-Since 1960 the teenage unemployment rate has risen when the minimum wage has risen.
-Since 1960 the teenage unemployment rate has risen even when the minimum wage remained constant.
-Employers often hire extra help during holiday and warm weather seasons.
-The teenage unemployment rate rose more quickly in the 1970's than it did in the 1960's.
-The teenage unemployment rate has occasionally declined in the years since 1960.

Why not E?
OA : B

E: The teenage unemployment rate has occasionally declined in the years since 1960

This is just the opposite of what is inferred from the argument.
I think we are supposed to find newer points, which are not derived from the original argument.
Also occasionally does not make it the most weakening reason.
Join the discussion

by garima99 » Tue Aug 16, 2011 7:32 pm
Teenagers are often priced out of the labor market by the government-mandated minimum-wage level because employers cannot afford to pay that much for extra help. Therefore, if Congress institutes a sub minimum wage, a new lower legal wage for teenagers, the teenage unemployment rate, which has been rising since 1960, will no longer increase.
Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument above?

-Since 1960 the teenage unemployment rate has risen when the minimum wage has risen. opposite
-Since 1960 the teenage unemployment rate has risen even when the minimum wage remained constant.
-Employers often hire extra help during holiday and warm weather seasons. no link
-The teenage unemployment rate rose more quickly in the 1970's than it did in the 1960's.
-The teenage unemployment rate has occasionally declined in the years since 1960.
Join the discussion

by AN24 » Fri Aug 19, 2011 11:12 am
Therefore, if Congress institutes a subminimum wage, a new lower legal wage for teenagers, the teenage unemployment rate, which has been rising since 1960, will no longer increase.
E goes against the Premise.
E attacks the Premise not the conclusion.

Hope it helps!
Join the discussion