Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the-OG10#139 : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 24 Jan 2017, 16:41

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the-OG10#139

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 598
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 217 [12] , given: 0

Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the-OG10#139 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Sep 2004, 13:36
12
KUDOS
40
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

53% (02:10) correct 47% (01:26) wrong based on 2550 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people in this country now report that they know someone who is unemployed.

Sharon: But a normal, moderate level of unemployment is 5 percent, with 1 out of 20 workers unemployed. So at any given time if a person knows approximately 50 workers, 1 or more will very likely be unemployed.

Sharon's argument relies on the assumption that

(A) normal levels of unemployment are rarely exceeded
(B) unemployment is not normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of the population
(C) the number of people who each know someone who is unemployed is always higher than 90% of the population
(D) Roland is not consciously distorting the statistics he presents
(E) knowledge that a personal acquaintance is unemployed generates more fear of losing one's job than does knowledge of unemployment statistics

Note: There is another question (conclusion question) which is based upon the same argument. For reading and further discussion on that question, please use the following link:
roland-the-alarming-fact-is-that-90-percent-of-the-og10-8416.html
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
If you have any questions
you can ask an expert
New!
Manager
Joined: 27 Aug 2004
Posts: 125
Location: US
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 3 [1] , given: 0

### Show Tags

09 Sep 2004, 15:12
1
KUDOS
A.

I am getting this by process of elimination.

(B) unemployment is not normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of the population -- Geographical isolation is not discussed in the argument.

(C) the number of people who each know someone who is unemployed is always higher than 90% of the population -- General statement

(D) Roland is not consciously distorting the statistics he presents
-- This is not the assumption

(E) knowledge that a personal acquaintance is unemployed generates more fear of losing one's job than does knowledge of unemployment statistics -- General statement
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4302
Followers: 40

Kudos [?]: 429 [40] , given: 0

### Show Tags

09 Sep 2004, 18:12
40
KUDOS
9
This post was
BOOKMARKED
B it is
A) This is not an assumption and will not affect the argument/conclusion given.
B) negate this one and you get:
unemployment is normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of the population
What is the implication of the above? If unemployment is concentrated in certain areas, how can we say that if someone who knows 50 persons will very likely know more than 1 person who is unemployed?
Let's take a simple number example. Country A has two cities: X and Y
City X: population = 100 --> 10 are unemployed
City Y: population = 100 --> 0 are unemployed
Total unemployment rate for country A: 10/200 = 5% --> as claimed by Sharon
As you can see in my example, unemployment is concentrated in a geographical location: city X
Hence, if that someone who Sharon is talking about lives in city Y, is it right to say that that person is likely to know more than one person who is unemployed? No, because that person lives in a city where there is no unemployment whatsoever.
Conclusion: We need to assume that unemployment is not isolated in geographically isolated segments of the population. If not, the argument falls apart.
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

Director
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 964
Location: Florida
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 127 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

09 Sep 2004, 18:45
agree with B.

see a diff version of it:
http://www.gmatclub.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=8416
Intern
Joined: 25 Apr 2004
Posts: 17
Location: New Zealand
Followers: 0

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

### Show Tags

09 Sep 2004, 20:30
I would have chosen (A) but Paul's reasoning makes sense
Senior Manager
Joined: 16 Aug 2004
Posts: 327
Location: India
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

10 Sep 2004, 04:12
I tend to differ with Paul. My answer is choice A.

Sharon's statement starts with the qualifier "Moderate level of employment is 5 percent...".
Whole of his arguement is based on the fact that these are very Normal and not alarming

It can only be true if the underlying assumption is A, hence the answer.
B is close but the there are no premises that hint difference in geographies.
All the other options can be ruled out
Director
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 863
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 199 [0], given: 0

Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Dec 2004, 17:34
Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people in this country now report that they know someone who is unemployed.
Sharon: But a normal, moderate level of unemployment is 5 percent, with 1 out of 20 workers unemployed. So at any given time if a person knows approximately 50 workers, 1 or more will very likely be unemployed.

Sharon's argument relies on the assumption that
(A) normal levels of unemployment are rarely exceeded
(B) unemployment is not normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of the population
(C) the number of people who each know someone who is unemployed is always higher than 90% of the population
(D) Roland is not consciously distorting the statistics he presents
(E) knowledge that a personal acquaintance is unemployed generates more fear of losing one's job than does knowledge of unemployment statistics

Hightlight below
Sharonâ€™s argument assumes that people are generally similar in how likely they are to have among their acquaintances people who are unemployed. Since heavy concentrations of unemployment in geographically isolated segments of the population would produce great differences in this respect, Sharonâ€™s argument assumes few, if any, such concentrations. Choice B is therefore the best answer. If normal levels of unemployment were exceeded relatively frequently, and if Rolandâ€™s figure of 90 percent were an exaggeration, Sharonâ€™s argument would be unaffected, so choices A and D are incorrect. At exceptionally low
levels of unemployment, Sharonâ€™s argument suggests that choice C is likely to be false, so C is not assumed. The fear of losing oneâ€™s job is not part of Sharonâ€™s argument, so choice E is incorrect.

After I read the explaination, I still don't understand. Can someone bring me a better view? Thanks.
Manager
Joined: 13 Dec 2004
Posts: 51
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 6 [1] , given: 0

### Show Tags

21 Dec 2004, 21:48
1
KUDOS
Hi,

You didn't include the explanation, so I hope this helps. I'd choose B.

A) this answer is out of the scope of the question.
B) this is the best answer. My first thought when reading S's response was that she was assuming that unemployed people are distributed evenly throughout the population. This would be required for her interpolation of the statistics to be true. B says nearly this, that if the unemployed aren't distributed evenly geographically, then her response isn't valid.
C) This answer is out of scope, and also contradicts R's facts, which we can assume are true for the purposes of the question.
D) Roland's facts don't figure into her response, only her interpretation so this answer isn't right.
E) This response is unrelated to the question.
Director
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 863
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 199 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

22 Dec 2004, 05:11
Thanks, the explaination above. All you have to do is hightlight it with the mouse because it is in while color.
Manager
Joined: 13 Dec 2004
Posts: 51
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

22 Dec 2004, 09:31
I figured that out later after I responded to you! Felt kinda dumb.
Director
Joined: 17 Sep 2005
Posts: 924
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 74 [0], given: 0

Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jun 2006, 09:19
Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people in this country now report that they know someone who is unemployed.

Sharon: But a normal, moderate level of unemployment is 5 percent, with 1 out of 20 workers unemployed. So at any given time if a person knows approximately 50 workers, 1 or more will very likely be unemployed.

Sharonâ€™s argument relies on the assumption that _____________
(A) normal levels of unemployment are rarely exceeded
(B) unemployment is not normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of the population
(C) the number of people who each know someone who is unemployed is always higher than 90% of the population
(D) Roland is not consciously distorting the statistics he presents
(E) knowledge that a personal acquaintance is unemployed generates more fear of losing oneâ€™s job than does knowledge of unemployment statistics

Regards,
Brajesh
Director
Joined: 10 Oct 2005
Posts: 528
Location: US
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 58 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

12 Jun 2006, 09:26
B it is ---

(A) - doesn't convey any meaning
(C) that's what first person says. so it's contradictory.
(D) out of scope
(E) out of scope.
Director
Joined: 09 Oct 2005
Posts: 720
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

12 Jun 2006, 09:27
I ll go with D
_________________

IE IMBA 2010

VP
Joined: 25 Nov 2004
Posts: 1493
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 98 [1] , given: 0

Re: CR - Alarming Fact [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jun 2006, 09:28
1
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
should be B.

to know the unemplyoment of 5% by 90%, the unemplyoed people should be disperse all over the countr/nation/state/ or whatewver.
VP
Joined: 02 Jun 2006
Posts: 1267
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 80 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

12 Jun 2006, 10:30
Confused?? Can someone explain in a little more detail?
Director
Joined: 26 Mar 2006
Posts: 647
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

12 Jun 2006, 21:29
a tough one....

Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people in this country now report that they know someone who is unemployed.

Roland here gives a big picture. He starts the sentence with "The alarming fact" which means he is making it big and adds a figure 90% of population knows someone who is unemployed...

Sharon: But a normal, moderate level of unemployment is 5 percent, with 1 out of 20 workers unemployed. So at any given time if a person knows approximately 50 workers, 1 or more will very likely be unemployed.

But Sharon plays it down by saying normally umemployment is only 5%. But he ends the statement by 1 or more will very likely be unemployed.

I will go for 'A'
Intern
Joined: 12 Jun 2006
Posts: 49
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

12 Jun 2006, 21:58
Use the POE method.

A) Sounds OK because Sharon is not alarmed with Roland's say. Lets
keep this aside.
B) Sounds a little away from the passage because Sharon does not
assume this and talks nothing about the geograpical area. Option (A) is
still the best one.
C) This is what Roland says, and not Sharon. This also uses the
word "always" which is generally not the right choice to make.
D) Sharon does not mean anything like this in her say. Out of scope.
Remember (A) is still our best choice.
E) No where in the conversation does it imply about losing one's job. This
choice is trying to go way beyond the discussion. Hence
cannot be the right choice.

Leaving us with Choice (A).
VP
Joined: 07 Nov 2005
Posts: 1131
Location: India
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 41 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

12 Jun 2006, 22:34
Even I will pick A.
SVP
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 1737
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 78 [1] , given: 0

### Show Tags

13 Jun 2006, 02:23
1
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Will go with B.
Roland argues that 90% of people report that they know somebody unemployed. Whereas Sharon argues that the unemployment rate is only 5%. Hence if a person know 50 other persons..... one of them could be unemployed.
Now she is assumping that unemployement is not present in specific areas and is spread out to different geographical regions such that people are acquainted with different class of people.
Director
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 945
Location: France
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

13 Jun 2006, 05:32
How can Sharon say that if you know 20 people you will know 1 who is unemployed? By assuming B
_________________

I believe its yogurt!

13 Jun 2006, 05:32

Go to page    1   2   3   4    Next  [ 71 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people 0 07 Mar 2013, 17:47
Roland: the alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people 0 22 Aug 2011, 12:28
Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people 0 08 Aug 2008, 19:12
Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people 0 10 Dec 2011, 13:24
Roland :The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people 0 03 Jun 2007, 15:41
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the-OG10#139

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 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®.