Last visit was: 24 Apr 2024, 08:54 It is currently 24 Apr 2024, 08:54

Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
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.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 10 Apr 2012
Posts: 244
Own Kudos [?]: 4418 [2]
Given Kudos: 325
Location: United States
Concentration: Technology, Other
GPA: 2.44
WE:Project Management (Telecommunications)
Send PM
User avatar
Director
Director
Joined: 02 Sep 2012
Status:Far, far away!
Posts: 859
Own Kudos [?]: 4890 [1]
Given Kudos: 219
Location: Italy
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.8
Send PM
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 10 Apr 2012
Posts: 244
Own Kudos [?]: 4418 [0]
Given Kudos: 325
Location: United States
Concentration: Technology, Other
GPA: 2.44
WE:Project Management (Telecommunications)
Send PM
User avatar
Director
Director
Joined: 02 Sep 2012
Status:Far, far away!
Posts: 859
Own Kudos [?]: 4890 [1]
Given Kudos: 219
Location: Italy
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.8
Send PM
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian [#permalink]
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).

Hope it's clear
User avatar
Director
Director
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Status:Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Posts: 734
Own Kudos [?]: 1857 [0]
Given Kudos: 70
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE:Engineering (Transportation)
Send PM
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian [#permalink]
Excellent question......I ended up selecting B....bt yes C is the correct answer. Can anyone explain why the answer is not B.

Archit
User avatar
Director
Director
Joined: 02 Sep 2012
Status:Far, far away!
Posts: 859
Own Kudos [?]: 4890 [0]
Given Kudos: 219
Location: Italy
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.8
Send PM
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian [#permalink]
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.
User avatar
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 11 Dec 2012
Posts: 310
Own Kudos [?]: 633 [1]
Given Kudos: 66
Send PM
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian [#permalink]
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.

Hope this helps!
-Ron
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 10 Apr 2012
Posts: 244
Own Kudos [?]: 4418 [0]
Given Kudos: 325
Location: United States
Concentration: Technology, Other
GPA: 2.44
WE:Project Management (Telecommunications)
Send PM
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian [#permalink]
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.

Hope this helps!
-Ron



thank you Ron and Zarrolou +1 to both of you !
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 25 Jan 2012
Posts: 5
Own Kudos [?]: 3 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian [#permalink]
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.
User avatar
Director
Director
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Status:Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Posts: 734
Own Kudos [?]: 1857 [0]
Given Kudos: 70
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE:Engineering (Transportation)
Send PM
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian [#permalink]
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.
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 25 Jan 2012
Posts: 5
Own Kudos [?]: 3 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian [#permalink]
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.
avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 13 Dec 2012
Posts: 104
Own Kudos [?]: 77 [0]
Given Kudos: 19
Send PM
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian [#permalink]
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 .
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 17216
Own Kudos [?]: 848 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian [#permalink]
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.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Critical Reasoning (CR) Forum
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.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Politician: After a civil war two decades ago, the Laconian [#permalink]
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6917 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne