Las Vegas population

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2011 4:50 am
Location: India
Thanked: 28 times
Followed by:6 members

Las Vegas population

by vishugogo » Mon Jul 08, 2013 4:33 am
Over the last three years, the city of Las Vegas has grown in population at a rate of six percent per year. Over the same period of time, however, water usage inside the city of Las Vegas is down almost fifteen percent.

Each of the following, if true, could help to explain the simultaneous decline in water usage and increase in population in Las Vegas, EXCEPT:

A)Due to drought awareness campaigns, the average citizen in Las Vegas now uses almost thirty percent less water now than he or she did three years ago.

B)Two years ago, the city instituted a popular new incentive program for citizens to tear out high water consuming lawns and replace them with low water consuming desert landscaping.

C)The city council has proposed a moratorium on the construction of high water consuming golf courses starting in two years.

D)Three years ago a mining company that consumed vast amounts of water operated within the city limits; now that company is out of business.

E)The mayor ordered that all of the city's hundreds of fountains be shut off, reducing water use due to evaporation considerably.

I was able to point out the correct option C

But I am confused by the fact that the question is explain type....and the answer to that will always explain both sides of the paradox....no options seems to correct this fact rather only explains one side of the argument.
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 11:32 am
Location: Chicago, IL

by dumbest » Mon Jul 08, 2013 7:12 am
You don't need an explaination for both - why population rose & why water usage declined. All you need is a link between the two. A,B,D,E ,if true, will help to explain the phenomenon.
C doesn't.
Coming Soon!!

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2012 5:44 pm
Thanked: 5 times
Followed by:3 members

by [email protected] » Mon Jul 22, 2013 5:41 am
Each of the following, if true, could help to explain the simultaneous decline in water usage and increase in population in Las Vegas, EXCEPT

The question is not asking you to answer how both are individually happening. It is just asking you to Resolve the paradox that why when the population increased, then water is decreasing. It is naturally assuming the two things.

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2193
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 6:30 pm
Location: Vermont and Boston, MA
Thanked: 1186 times
Followed by:512 members
GMAT Score:770

by David@VeritasPrep » Mon Jul 22, 2013 9:02 am
vishugogo -

You have made such a good point!! Most people think that you need to focus on "both sides of the paradox equally" but this is not true. You see, one side of the paradox should be essentially self-explanatory (or well enough explained by the argument) while the other side is the one that needs to be explained.

So in this case, it is self -explanatory that the population has increased - right? Do you need any further information on this?

But we do need to explain why (in light of the increase in population) there has been a decrease in water consumption. So that is how both sides get involved. You need to explain the surprising fact - which has become more surprising due to the other fact. You see on it's own, decreased water usage is not that surprising. But it becomes much more surprising when we consider that the population has increased.

Try this method going forward. Identify the "simple fact" that has been well explained or does not need to be explained and the identify the "surprising fact" that needs an explanation. Focus on the surprising fact when you go to the answer choices. Just remember, it may the be simple fact that has made it so surprising!
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course