Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum
Learn more about the recent changes... close

It is currently 25 May 2013, 22:31
Customize  |  Hide

Search
Register
New posts
Unanswered

Recent estimates predict that between 1982 and 1995 the

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews  
  Oldest Best Reply
Search for:
 
Print view
First unread post
Author Message
TAGS:
Intern
Intern
Joined: 16 Apr 2003
Posts: 23
Location: Taiwan
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

Recent estimates predict that between 1982 and 1995 the [#permalink] New post 29 Aug 2003, 02:38
00:00

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
Recent estimates predict that between 1982 and 1995 the greatest increase in the number of people employed will be in the category of low-paying service occupations. This category, however, will not increase its share of total employment, whereas the category of high-paying service occupations will increase its share.

If the estimates above are accurate, which of the following conclusions can be drawn?

(A) In 1982 more people were working in low-paying service occupations than were working in high-paying service occupations.
(B) In 1995 more people will be working in high-paying service occupations than will be working in low-paying service occupations.
(C) Nonservice occupations will account for the same share of total emplyment in 1995 as in 1982.
(D) Many of the people who were working in low-paying service occupations in 1982 will be working in high-paying service occupations by 1995.
(E) The rate of growth for low-paying service occupations will be greater than the overall rate of employment growth between 1982 and 1995.

The answer is A. Well, I think this question should appear in Quantitative rather than in Verbal :p
Can someone do the math for me? Thanks~
2 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 08 Aug 2003
Posts: 92
Location: Moscow, Russia
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [2] , given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 30 Aug 2003, 05:57
2
This post received
KUDOS
Do not think that this question pertaining much more to quant rather than to verbal. However, we can apply some gmat-tricks from quant section (pick numbers) :lol:

Say that in 1982 there were 90 low-paid , 5 mid-paid guys and 5 high-paid guys.
We want to keep proportion of low-paid guys constant.
In order to do that, just multiply by 2 each number.

In 1985 - we will have 180 low-paid , 10 mid-paid, 10 high-paid
(Please note that proportion of low-paid remained the same = 90%)

now we need just to slightly play with numbers (in order to comply with presented argument)

Let's have 180 low-paid 0 mid paid 20 high-paid guys in 1985

From 1982 to 1985, the number of low-paid guys had increased by 90 (however proportion remained 90%), the number of high-paid had increased just by 10 (however proportion had increased from 5% to 10%)

As you can see - now we comply with argument!

A just describes our example!
Manager
Manager
Joined: 12 Feb 2008
Posts: 186
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: One CR Question [#permalink] New post 24 Sep 2008, 06:24
% increase of a part, doesnt mean for sure % increase of the total.
1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
Joined: 27 Aug 2008
Posts: 150
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 30 [1] , given: 0

Re: [#permalink] New post 24 Sep 2008, 11:00
1
This post received
KUDOS
Mikhail wrote:
Do not think that this question pertaining much more to quant rather than to verbal. However, we can apply some gmat-tricks from quant section (pick numbers) :lol:

Say that in 1982 there were 90 low-paid , 5 mid-paid guys and 5 high-paid guys.
We want to keep proportion of low-paid guys constant.
In order to do that, just multiply by 2 each number.

In 1985 - we will have 180 low-paid , 10 mid-paid, 10 high-paid
(Please note that proportion of low-paid remained the same = 90%)

now we need just to slightly play with numbers (in order to comply with presented argument)

Let's have 180 low-paid 0 mid paid 20 high-paid guys in 1985

From 1982 to 1985, the number of low-paid guys had increased by 90 (however proportion remained 90%), the number of high-paid had increased just by 10 (however proportion had increased from 5% to 10%)

As you can see - now we comply with argument!

A just describes our example!


Excellent explaination. You deserve +1 for this. Also a brilliant question. Real GMAT throws exactly these type of questions in higher levels.
Manager
Manager
Joined: 22 Jul 2008
Posts: 156
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

Re: One CR Question [#permalink] New post 24 Sep 2008, 11:36
Let's say there are 100 jobs in 1982 of which, 40 are low-paying service jobs, 30 are high-paying service jobs and 30 are others.
Let's say 50 more jobs are added between 1982 and 1995.
To maintain the same % of low-paying jobs as the question claims, 40% of 50 i.e., 20 jobs should be low-paying and rest 30 jobs could be divided any way between the other 2 categories. Since, the increment in low-paying jobs is more than in high-paying jobs, less than 20 new jobs would be high-paying. How is it possible to have less increase in the number of jobs yet, have a higher increase in the % of those jobs? The only way this can happen is, if the existing % of jobs of that category is lower. Therefore, at the present time (1982), there should be lesser H-P jobs than L-P jobs.
The ans should be A.
Re: One CR Question   [#permalink] 24 Sep 2008, 11:36
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
 New posts Recent estimates predict that between 1982 and 1995 the WinWinMBA 8 25 Apr 2005, 17:10
New posts Recent estimates predict that between 1982 and 1995 the AJB77 5 06 Aug 2005, 19:32
New posts Recent estimates predict that between 1982 and 1995 the rahuluec 3 16 Oct 2005, 08:34
New posts Recent estimates predict that between 1982 and 1995 the nakib77 9 02 Nov 2005, 14:09
Popular new posts Recent estimates predict that between 1982 and 1995 the remgeo 15 05 Apr 2006, 07:18
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Recent estimates predict that between 1982 and 1995 the

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews  
Print view
First unread post

Moderators: metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn

Search for:


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.

Main navigation

GMAT Resources

Partners

MBA Resources

www.gmac.com|www.mba.com