|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 894
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
20
[0], given: 0
|
Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both [#permalink]
23 Dec 2004, 11:38
Question Stats:
68% (02:13) correct
31% (03:32) wrong based on 3 sessions
Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both grain and meat. However, as per capita income in Gortland has risen toward the world average, per capita consumption of meat has also risen toward the world average, and it takes several pounds of grain to produce one pound of meat. Therefore, since per capita income continues to rise, whereas domestic grain production will not increase, Gortland will soon have to import either grain or meat or both. Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends? (A) The total acreage devoted to grain production in Gortland will soon decrease. (B) Importing either grain or meat will not result in a significantly higher percentage of Gortlanders' incomes being spent on food than is currently the case. (C) The per capita consumption of meat in Gortland is increasing at roughly the same rate across all income levels. (D) The per capita income of meat producers in Gortland is rising faster than the per capita income of grain producers. (E) People in Gortland who increase their consumption of meat will not radically decrease their consumption of grain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 12 Dec 2004
Posts: 5
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
Choice E says people will NOT radically decrease consumption of grain - which means the demand could remain the same (if not increased). It is also stated that it takes several pounds of grain to produce one pound of meat, and if the consumption of meat increases, it implies that the need for grain automatically increases. And if people do not reduce the consumption of grain, they could fall short of grains (to get the meat), which could call for import of the grains too !!
Cheers !!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 894
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
20
[0], given: 0
|
Oh, I did missed that part. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Affiliations: FRM Charter holder
Joined: 02 Dec 2006
Posts: 737
Schools: Stanford, Chicago Booth, Babson College
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
8
[0], given: 4
|
E is my answer. If the consumption of grain comes down, then there is no need to import the grain or meat or both.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 111
Location: Where you mind is
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
OA is E
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 10 Jun 2007
Posts: 1478
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
70
[0], given: 0
|
fresinha12 wrote: Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both grain and meat. However, as per capita income in Gortland has risen toward the world average, per capita consumption of meat has also risen toward the world average, and it takes several pounds of grain to produce one pound of meat. Therefore, since per capita income continues to rise, whereas domestic grain production will not increase, Gortland will soon have to import either grain or meat or both. Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends? (A) The total acreage devoted to grain production in Gortland will not decrease substantially. (B) The population of Gortland has remained relatively constant during the country’s years of growing prosperity. (C) The per capita consumption of meat in Gortland is roughly the same across all income levels. (D) In Gortland, neither meat nor grain is subject to government price controls. (E) People in Gortland who increase their consumption of meat will not radically decrease their consumption of grain.
This question is from OG...
My issue is that in E..if the populate were to decrese, per capita income would still go up, and so would per capita consumption of meat...but if thats the case..there will still be sufficient grain ..since NET demand is falling..
I am not sure why B is wrong...
any takers?
B cannot be right. The consumption of meat depends on the increase in income, not the actual number of population. Say that the population increases during the prosperity period, but those people are the ones with low income, then the consumption of meat will still be the same.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 21 Dec 2010
Posts: 657
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
58
[0], given: 51
|
i got this right in 1:15 min, but will post the oa later on
_________________
What is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1400
Followers: 8
Kudos [?]:
84
[0], given: 10
|
Clean E, where negating it gives clear indication that if people stop reduce consumption of grains drastically,the country might not even Import either grains or meat. E
_________________
Visit -- http://www.sustainable-sphere.com/ Promote Green Business,Sustainable Living and Green Earth !!
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 16 Nov 2010
Posts: 1721
Location: United States (IN)
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
Followers: 26
Kudos [?]:
228
[0], given: 34
|
B and E are the ones to be considered. I chose E over B because on a second look at B,if the popultation growth is negated then we havt to consider both rise and fall in population, and these two may have different effects on the argument. For example, if population decreases while total meat consumed is same, the per capita consumption increases and if population groth increases while total meat consumed is same, the per capita consumption decreases. E states that if both grains and fruits are consumed at an increasing rate, there will be a shortage making import of both necessary.
_________________
Formula of Life -> Achievement/Potential = k * Happiness (where k is a constant)
Find out what's new at GMAT Club - latest features and updates
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 21 Dec 2010
Posts: 657
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
58
[0], given: 51
|
OA is E very clearly.
_________________
What is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 10 Jan 2011
Posts: 238
Location: India
GMAT Date: 07-16-2012
GPA: 3.4
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
24
[0], given: 20
|
I got E within 1 min
_________________
-------Analyze why option A in SC wrong-------
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Status: MBAing!!!!
Joined: 24 Jun 2011
Posts: 314
Location: United States (FL)
Concentration: Finance, Real Estate
Schools: Wharton '14 (D), CBS '14 (WL), Ross '14 (WL), Haas '14 (D), Johnson '14 (A), McCombs '14, Kenan-Flagler '14 (M), Madison (A), Consortium (D), Consortium (A), Consortium (M), Consortium, Consortium (A), Consortium (WL)
GPA: 3.65
WE: Project Management (Real Estate)
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
41
[0], given: 56
|
I got E...It took me 2:08 minutes
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 15 Nov 2010
Posts: 109
Followers: 4
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 15
|
garimavyas wrote: Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both grain and meat. However, as per capita income in Gortland has risen toward the world average, per capita consumption of meat has also risen toward the world average, and it takes several pounds of grain to produce one pound of meat. Therefore, since per capita income continues to rise, whereas domestic grain production will not increase, Gortland will soon have to import either grain or meat or both. Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends? (A) The total acreage devoted to grain production in Gortland will not decrease substantially. (B) The population of Gortland has remained relatively constant during the country’s years of growing prosperity. (C) The per capita consumption of meat in Gortland is roughly the same across all income levels. (D) In Gortland, neither meat nor grain is subject to government price controls. (E) People in Gortland who increase their consumption of meat will not radically decrease their consumption of grain.
oa after discussion , please post your timing too. E. If the meat consumption increases and grain consumption does not decrease, then it might push Gortland to import meat, grain or both.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Posts: 56
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
5
[0], given: 18
|
E. took 1:15 mins!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 09 Jun 2011
Posts: 95
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
imo E. 00:47
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|