Violent forms of robbery tend to be most severe in nations with median wages not in the bottom 10% of nations, but

[BTGmoderatorDC]

Violent forms of robbery tend to be most severe in nations with median wages not in the bottom 10% of nations, but rather between the 10% and 20% intervals. Although that shifted bulge might seem to run counter to what many might presume would be the case, there is a reasonable explanation for the bulge effect. As an economy begins develop, an initial wave of envy tends to trigger robberies, including violent robberies. As the economy develops further, a greater percentage of that society exits poverty, which in turn reduces envy, and thereby the number of robberies. Therefore, we can expect Baltria to soon see its violent robbery rate decrease given that its economy has begun to develop over the last several years.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. Once an economy begins to develop, there tends to be a tightening of law enforcement, and punishment for violent crime offenses.

B. Once an economy develops, a spill-off effect can help bolster the economies of neighboring countries, further reinforcing economic development.

C. Baltria's economic development will not stall in the near-future.

D. Baltrian leaders are committed to making Baltria one of the most economically advanced nations in the region.

E. No other country in the region has a violent robbery rate as high as that of Baltria’s.



OA C

Source: EMPOWERgmat

[Gene@KaplanGMAT]

When the conclusion of a GMAT argument offers a prediction, as this one does (that we can expect Baltria to see its robbery rate decrease), the assumption is that no circumstance will prevent this prediction from coming true. In this case, nothing will prevent Baltria's economy from continuing to develop. That directly leads us to answer choice (C).

(A) and (B) don't even mentions Baltria at all, which is a deal-breaker since the conclusion of the argument is about Baltria. And (D) and (E) offer irrelevant comparisons between Baltria and other countries.
So (C) is the only one that is even within the scope of the argument.

[deloitte247]

Premise: Violent forms of robbery tend to be most severe in nations with median wages not in the bottom 10% of nations, but rather between the 10% and 20% intervals.

Conclusion: Baltria will soon see its violent robbery rate decrease given that its economy has begun to develop over the last several years.

Below, we will discuss each option on which the argument depends.

Option A - Incorrect:
This option has no correlation with Baltria which is the conclusion of this argument. However, according to the passage, once the economy of a nation begins to develop, an initial wave of envy tends to trigger robberies, including violent robberies, and not tends to be a tightening of law enforcement and punishment for violent crime offenses.

Option B - Incorrect:
This is beyond the scope of this argument

Option C - Correct:
This means that nothing will stop the economy of Baltria from growing in the near future. From the passage conclusion, Baltria economy has been on the increase over the last several years; this implies that it economic continually growing. Hence, this validates the claim portrayed in this option.

Option D - Incorrect:
The passage focuses on the Baltria economy and the leaders' commitment or impacts.

Option E - Incorrect:
There is no such information in the passage regarding the statistics of violent robbery between Baltria and other countries in the same region Baltria is. Thus, this claim is not sufficient enough to be the basis for the argument.