Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
In the United States, of the people who moved from one state [#permalink]
10 Mar 2009, 03:31
This post received KUDOS
This post was BOOKMARKED
52% (02:05) correct
48% (01:13) wrong based on 517 sessions
HideShow timer Statictics
In the United States, of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired, the percentage who retired to Florida has decreased by three percentage points over the past ten years. Since many local businesses in Florida cater to retirees, this decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
(A) Florida attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state. (B) The number of people who move out of Florida to accept employment in other states has increased over the past ten years. (C) There are far more local businesses in Florida that cater to tourists than there are local businesses that cater to retirees. (D) The total number of people who retired and moved to another state for their retirement has increased significantly over the past ten years. (E) The number of people who left Florida when they retired to live in another state was greater last year than it was ten years ago.
D is actually OOS(out of scope) as here we have to show that local businesses in florida(all other places are OOS here)will thrive even though retired guys are down by %-age point C says far more local businesses in Florida that cater to tourists -->hence will continue to flourish hence C _________________
No I dnt think OA is C. check again frm ur source. This question has been discssed many times b4. OA shld be D. This is a %age trap question.If the totall no of ppl has increase in last ten years then te decrease in % will not matter. suppose no of ppl who migrated ten yers ago was 100 and the percentage who retired to Florida was 10%. tehn total no of ppl is 10. now increase the total no to 1000 then whteher the % decreases, sstill more no of ppl is more
I also think the answer should be D. As ritula points out a decrease in a share doesn't have to imply a decrease in absolute figures as long as a raise in the basis (here the total number of people who move from one state to another when they retire) can offset this effect.
Yes, it's certainly D. Answer choice C is the one which is out of scope. The question only pertains to 'these businesses', the ones which cater to retirees. Businesses which cater to tourists aren't relevant to the question. _________________
GMAT Tutor in Toronto
If you are looking for online GMAT math tutoring, or if you are interested in buying my advanced Quant books and problem sets, please contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com
i think ans should be B. florida business caters on retire people. conclusion says because of retire people increase local business will not do well. but as said in A. if from other states more retire people are attract to florida then the retire person population will rise than out going people. hence instead business will do well.
'D' is tricky and looks attractive but question remains what if most of the people who retires are from Florida itself? Also there is one better option available as explained below.
Answer 'A' most logically weakens the statement by saying that Florida is still a great destination for retiree. There is drop in terms of sheer numbers & percentage as well (of inflow) in last ten years, however there is no negative inflow but highest inflow in numbers than any other state. This inflow will provide supoprt to local businesses in florida than negatively affect those local businesses.