Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized for You
we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Track Your Progress
every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance
Practice Pays
we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
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:
For more than a decade, Target Test Prep has been helping GMAT students clear seemingly impossible hurdles and achieve MASSIVE score increases on test day. Our students prove time and time again that there is no “ceiling”...
Join us in a comprehensive talk about the F1 Student Visa process with Travis Feuerbacher, former U.S. Visa Officer and licensed U.S. immigration attorney having expertise working for the U.S. Department of State
Ready to skyrocket your career with an MBA? Get ahead with our curated list of FREE courses and resources to kickstart your journey into business education!
Are you attending an MBA or Masters program outside in the US or Europe and wondering how to finance your studies? In this exclusive conversation, we discuss the collateral-free non-cosigner education loans...
Solve 30 high quality GMAT Focus practice questions in timed conditions. Take this GMAT practise test live with peers, analyze your GMAT study progress, and see where you stand in the GMAT student pool.
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies, Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence, and Excel in timed test environment
Join us for an exclusive one-day event focused on mastering the GMAT and maximizing your preparation resources! Here's what you can expect: Don't miss out on this invaluable opportunity to supercharge your GMAT preparation journey.
Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian
[#permalink]
15 Apr 2013, 12:16
2
Bookmarks
Show timer
00:00
A
B
C
D
E
Difficulty:
(N/A)
Question Stats:
73%
(01:28)
correct
27%
(01:59)
wrong
based on 175
sessions
HideShow
timer Statistics
Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian Democratic Republic was separated into two independent states: the Laconian Socialistic Union (LSR) and The Republic of Laconia (TRL). Both newly born states initiated a series of in-depth economic reforms, and now, the average annual per capita income in TRL is 20% greater than in LSR. Given that the two territories had roughly the same average per capita income before the civil war, we can conclude that reforms undertaken by LSR have led to a decrease in the average per capita income of that state’s residents.
The argument above depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A)The cost of living in both countries has remained roughly the same. (B)The population of LSR is roughly the same as that of TRL. (C)Reforms initiated by TRL have not resulted in per capita income growing to be 20% greater than two decades ago. (D)LSU reforms were aimed at concentrating all major industries under state ownership, while TRL focused its reforms on supporting privately owned businesses. (E)Prior to the split, most of the income generating businesses were situated in territories that became part of TRL.
OA to follow soon....
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian
[#permalink]
15 Apr 2013, 12:30
1
Kudos
We have to look for an answer that supports the conclusion: "reforms undertaken by LSR have led to a decrease in the average per capita income of that state’s residents". This difference must be originated not by the good reforms of TSR, but by the bad reforms in LSR.
(C)Reforms initiated by TRL have not resulted in per capita income growing to be 20% greater than two decades ago.
C states exactly this concept: the gap is a result of bad reforms in LSR. IMO C, waiting for OA...
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian
[#permalink]
15 Apr 2013, 12:41
1
Kudos
The passage says that they had the same income. So if now there is a difference and one income didn't grow (or grew slowly), then the other must have declined (thanks to bad reforms).
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian
[#permalink]
15 Apr 2013, 13:26
Archit143 wrote:
Excellent question......I ended up selecting B....bt yes C is the correct answer. Can anyone explain why the answer is not B.
Archit
Take a look at my explanation above. B is not correct because there is no correlation between the population and the decline in per capita income; the population could play a role here if we would talk about values like GPD, that don't take into consideration the number of citizens. But since we are talking about per capita values, the "value" of the population is not a disturbing factor.
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian
[#permalink]
15 Apr 2013, 14:39
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
The OA is C, which makes sense because it is the only choice that gives an alternative to the conclusion that is postulated in the question. The question assumes that the 20% difference between LSR and TSR is due to LSR performing poorly, when it could have just as easily been due to TSR performing well.
If you and I were making the same salary 5 years ago, and today yours is 20% greater, does that mean I did really badly at my job, or is it possible that I did okay and you did really well? Both possibilities would lead to the same situation, so answer choice C removes a significant weakness that could have damaged the purpoted conclusion.
Answer choices D and E seem to play along your potential preconceived notions of similar contries that have undergone similar transitions at one time or another (Germany, Korea), so this is a good reminder to leave the preconceived notions at home and examine the question solely on the information provided.
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian
[#permalink]
16 Apr 2013, 05:19
VeritasPrepRon wrote:
The OA is C, which makes sense because it is the only choice that gives an alternative to the conclusion that is postulated in the question. The question assumes that the 20% difference between LSR and TSR is due to LSR performing poorly, when it could have just as easily been due to TSR performing well.
If you and I were making the same salary 5 years ago, and today yours is 20% greater, does that mean I did really badly at my job, or is it possible that I did okay and you did really well? Both possibilities would lead to the same situation, so answer choice C removes a significant weakness that could have damaged the purpoted conclusion.
Answer choices D and E seem to play along your potential preconceived notions of similar contries that have undergone similar transitions at one time or another (Germany, Korea), so this is a good reminder to leave the preconceived notions at home and examine the question solely on the information provided.
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian
[#permalink]
16 Apr 2013, 07:01
Zarrolou wrote:
Archit143 wrote:
Excellent question......I ended up selecting B....bt yes C is the correct answer. Can anyone explain why the answer is not B.
Archit
Take a look at my explanation above. B is not correct because there is no correlation between the population and the decline in per capita income; the population could play a role here if we would talk about values like GPD, that don't take into consideration the number of citizens. But since we are talking about per capita values, the "value" of the population is not a disturbing factor.
To explain this in a slightly different way:
Per Capita is a per person number, basically an average number. The sample size doesn't have to be the same, or even relatively the same to compare average numbers.
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian
[#permalink]
16 Apr 2013, 07:34
If i am nt wrong...per capita = (total income/ population)...So if the total income of both the states are same , but they have varying population figs...i think per capita will change..so as to efficiently compare we must assume the population of both states to be same.
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian
[#permalink]
16 Apr 2013, 07:42
Archit143 wrote:
If i am nt wrong...per capita = (total income/ population)...So if the total income of both the states are same , but they have varying population figs...i think per capita will change..so as to efficiently compare we must assume the population of both states to be same.
Quote:
Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian Democratic Republic was separated into two independent states: the Laconian Socialistic Union (LSR) and The Republic of Laconia (TRL). Both newly born states initiated a series of in-depth economic reforms, and now, the average annual per capita income in TRL is 20% greater than in LSR. Given that the two territories had roughly the same average per capita income before the civil war, we can conclude that reforms undertaken by LSR have led to a decrease in the average per capita income of that state’s residents.
Total income was never part of the problem. The income has always been classified as per capita so the population sizes don't matter.
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian
[#permalink]
30 Apr 2013, 07:41
it has to be C ..... lets say their per capita incomes were x and y . now after 20 yrs x becomes 20 prcnt more than y . Now this can happen only either x increases by 20 prcnt or y decreases . C option answers it . More of a maths question .
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian
[#permalink]
04 Sep 2014, 23:29
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!
Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).
Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.