gmat test code 31

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:55 am
Thanked: 12 times

gmat test code 31

by nikhilkatira » Fri Jun 25, 2010 3:51 am
Demographers doing research for an international economics newsletter claim that the average per capita income in the country of Kuptala is substantially lower than that in the country of Bahlton. They also claim, however, that whereas poverty is relatively rare in Kuptala, over half the population of Bahlton lives in extreme poverty. At least one of the demographers' claims must, therefore, be wrong.

The argument above is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?

(A) It rejects an empirical claim about the average per capita incomes in the two countries without making any attempt to discredit that claim by offering additional economic evidence.

(B) It treats the vague term "poverty" as though it had a precise and universally accepted meaning.

(C) It overlooks the possibility that the number of people in the two countries who live in poverty could be the same even though the percentages of the two populations that live in poverty differ markedly.

(D) It fails to show that wealth and poverty have the same social significance in Kuptala as in Bahlton.

(E) It does not consider the possibility that incomes in Kuptala, unlike those in Bahlton, might all be very close to the country's average per capita income.
Best,
Nikhil H. Katira

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 392
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 2:42 am
Location: Bangalore, India
Thanked: 116 times
Followed by:10 members
GMAT Score:770

by albatross86 » Fri Jun 25, 2010 4:42 am
Demographers' claims:
1. Average per capita income in Kuptala < that in Bahlton
2. Poverty rare in Kuptala, but in Bahlton half of population is in extreme poverty

Conclusion is that 1 of the 2 claims MUST be wrong.

WEAKENER:


A. It does not particularly reject claim 1, it only says 1 of the 2 must be wrong.

B. Well perhaps poverty does in fact have a precise and universal meaning. Also , is this a flaw in the argument or a flaw in the claims of the demographers:? (which is actually a premise to the argument)

C. Actually we are not comparing actual number of people here at all. We are comparing income per person between 2 countries, and thus the percentage of people who are extremely poor is relevant to the conclusion.

D. Social significance is not at all in scope.

E. AHAH BINGO. This has a bit of statistical trivia in it. Average K < Average B. But we have that half of the people in B have much lower income than this average. This is clearly explained if the people in K all earn around the mean, but the people in B fluctuate around it. So it is possible that this increased mean of B even though they have 50% poor people, is due to the fact that they have 50% extremely rich people. This explains the APPARENT discrepancy between the two claims and thus WEAKENS the author's conclusion that 1 of the 2 must be wrong.

Pick E.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1460
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 1:28 am
Thanked: 135 times
Followed by:7 members

by selango » Fri Jun 25, 2010 9:17 am
IMO E

Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
Thanked: 173 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmatmachoman » Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:03 am
selango wrote:IMO E
@Nikil bhai

long time back kahani....

https://www.beatthegmat.com/poverty-t47160.html