betofx wrote:

Hi everyone. I know this is an old post and that the OE is E, but i still have some doubts. Please explain.

What about if our analysis goes this way (Check the attachment please)

Attachment:

Ditrama.png

It would prove that if just one of the other regions grows by a greater percentage than Korva did, Korva would not always have a decreased share of population. Please your help.

Thanks in advanced

Hope this helps, i found it on another forum and found it useful

Argument states that although K's population increased their revenue went down, which means K's population increase was less than the COMBINED increase of M and G

Let's start with 2010 (last/base year)

2010 - Total population 100

K - 40 (40% of total)

M - 40 (40% of total)

G - 20 (20% of total)

Inference 1 : In order for K's population to increase but also for its percentage to decrease total population of Ditrama had to have increased

Inference 2 : For the sake of proving E, there are 3 possible scenarios. K has a smaller increase than none, at least 1, or both other countries

2011 Total population 110 - smaller increase than one other country

K - 43 (7.5% increase; 39.09% of total)

M - 46 (15% increase; 41.82% of total)

G - 21 (5%% increase; 19.09% of total)

2011 Total population 110 - smaller increase than both countries

K - 41 (2.5% increase; 37.27% of total)

M - 46 (15% increase; 41.82% of total)

G - 23 (15% increase; 20.91% of total)

You can see that in both scenarios K's population increased while decreasing their share of the revenue pool (% of total population)

Now let's say that K had a bigger increase than both countries:

2011 Total population 110

K - 46 (15% increase; 41.82% of total)

M - 43 (7.5% increase; 39.09% of total)

G - 21 (5% increase; 19.09% of total)

In this scenario, K increased their population but also increased their share of the revenue pool (% of total population) which cannot be true according to the argument stated

I know this is a very simplified example but it seems like whatever number you plug in with accordance to the restrictions in the argument, it's impossible for K's population increase (%-wise) to be bigger than BOTH the other countries.

Hope this wasn't too confusing and if anyone finds anything wrong with my reasoning please inform!