Comparison

[sam2304]

A recent review of pay scales indicates that CEO's now earn an average of 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers, compared to a ratio of 42 times in 1980.
A. that CEO's now earn an average of 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers, compared to a ratio of 42 times
B. that, on average, CEO's now earn 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, a ratio that compares to 42 times
C. that, on average, CEO's now earn 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, as compared to 42 times their pay, the ratio
D. CEO's who now earn on average 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers, as compared to 42 times their pay, the ratio
E. CEO's now earning an average of 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, compared to the ratio of 42 times

[Mike@Magoosh]

Hi, there, I'm happy to help with this.

Prompt:
A recent review of pay scales indicates that CEO's now earn an average of 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers, compared to a ratio of 42 times in 1980.

One screaming problem in the prompt is the faulty comparison "CEO's now earn an average of 419 times more pay than blue-collar workers+ ---> "more pay than blue-collar workers" ----- as if the CEO's are earning both (a) pay, and (b) blue-collar workers, and the amount of pay they take home is 419x larger than the number of blue-collar workers they take home. That is literally what the sentence says, and not what the author intends, so we need to fix that.

Both (A) and (D) repeat that problem, "more pay than blue-collar workers", so they're both out. (B) & (C) & (E) all fix that problem.

(E) introduces the additional problem --- changing the clause (CEO's . . . earn) to a participial phrase (CEO's . . . earning), which means that the word "that" would not be followed by a full clause.

Studies indicate that CEO's earn more. Correct: full clause follows the word "that"

Studies indicate that CEO's earning more. Incomplete and incorrect.

That's the problem with (E), so (E) is out.

With (B) and (C), we come to the thorny issue of what exactly is being compared in the second part of the sentence? First of all, we are comparing one comparison to another comparison, which is about at the outer limit of difficulty for GMAT SC.

Hypothetically, if we were to go with (C), which ends: "as compared to 42 times their pay, the ratio in 1980", then the question arises --- what is the subject of the verb "compared"? What is the first term of the comparison? It's not the CEO, not the blue-collar works, not the pay of the blue-collar works. It's the "419 times" --- but that's not a noun: it's part of the modifier for the word "pay". The verb "compared" needs a bonafide noun as its subject --- the subject could be implied if the noun were stated explicitly in the first part of the sentence, but it's not.

Therefore, (C) is incorrect. We have to state, explicitly, a noun that is the first term of the comparison ---- the "419 times" as a noun is a "ratio". Thus, we have to insert the word "ratio" so that the verb "compared" has a proper subject. That leads us to (B)

A recent review of pay scales indicates that, on average, CEO's now earn 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, a ratio that compares to 42 times in 1980. Answer = B

That may sound awkward because it's an intensely complex set of ideas all packed into a single sentence. I would argue that a far simpler way to convey the information would be in two sentences, but that's not an option in GMAT SC.

Does all that make sense?

Here's another comparison SC question.

https://gmat.magoosh.com/questions/1149

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Mike

[sam2304]

Hypothetically, if we were to go with (C), which ends: "as compared to 42 times their pay, the ratio in 1980", then the question arises --- what is the subject of the verb "compared"? What is the first term of the comparison? It's not the CEO, not the blue-collar works, not the pay of the blue-collar works. It's the "419 times" --- but that's not a noun: it's part of the modifier for the word "pay". The verb "compared" needs a bonafide noun as its subject --- the subject could be implied if the noun were stated explicitly in the first part of the sentence, but it's not.

Therefore, (C) is incorrect.

Thanks a lot Mike. The above explanation was great I came up till here and ended up choosing C.

[GmatKiss]

Good one!! I am still not comfortable with B, i choose C
Can someone help me to end up with B!!

TIA,
GK

[jgmatk]

I have a question.

One thing unclear to me is what "CEO's" means.
Is is CEO's pay(possessive) or CEOs(plural)?

Thanks.

[kevincanspain]

a ratio that compares to 42 times

This expression in B is misleading, for if we say that one thing compares to another, the two things are similar

I see good parallel structure in C 419 times x as compared to 42 times x

[Mike@Magoosh]

I have a question.

One thing unclear to me is what "CEO's" means.
Is is CEO's pay(possessive) or CEOs(plural)?

CEO's is plural. In the phrase " . . . indicates that CEO's now earn an average of . . ", CEO's is the plural subject of the verb "earn".

Mike

[Anshu Nadir]

Good question ! And indeed a good explanation by Mike ..

Initially I also chose B, but it is actually an incorrect comparison. Its not clear what 42 times is compared to ..

Other reasons to eliminate D & E are that "indicate" being a deadly pronoun is not followed by "that"

Regards,
Anshu Nadir

[kevincanspain]

I actually believe that the correct answer is C, not B

[jgmatk]

I have a question.

One thing unclear to me is what "CEO's" means.
Is is CEO's pay(possessive) or CEOs(plural)?

CEO's is plural. In the phrase " . . . indicates that CEO's now earn an average of . . ", CEO's is the plural subject of the verb "earn".

Mike

Thanks you, Mike.

[kevincanspain]

https://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/gma ... t1889.html

[sam2304]

@Kevincanspain - Thanks a lot. The OA is given wrongly as B. I took the question from verbal sets.

[kevincanspain]

Verbal sets have a lot of good questions, but don't trust the answer keys. Be sure to perform a search and look for analysis by an instructor