|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 06 Nov 2010
Posts: 23
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 16
|
Senator : The average per capita after-tax income for [#permalink]
 28 Jan 2011, 07:06
Question Stats:
50% (01:00) correct
50% (01:25) wrong based on 2 sessions
Senator : The average per capita after-tax income for residents of Eastbury is $30,105. 2 years ago, it was 11% lower. This can be directly attributer to the comprehensive set of tax cuts that I helped get approved in congress. Which of the following statements, if true, most strengthens the conclusion drawn by the senator? a) The average per capita after-tax income for the residents of Eastbury who fall below the poverty line increased by 16% in the last 5 years. b) The senator has not personally benefited from the tax cuts. c) The number of residents of Eastbury has not substantially changed in the last two eyars d) The federal tax rate rose 6% during the 4 years prior to the implementation of the tax cuts. e) A recent changes in the estate laws did not substantially increase the average per capita income before-tax income of the residents of Eastbury
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 06 Nov 2010
Posts: 23
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 16
|
Re: Average per capita income [#permalink]
28 Jan 2011, 10:02
praveenvino wrote: Senator : The average per capita after-tax income for residents of Eastbury is $30,105. 2 years ago, it was 11% lower. This can be directly attributer to the comprehensive set of tax cuts that I helped get approved in congress.
Which of the following statements, if true, most strengthens the conclusion drawn by the senator?
a) The average per capita after-tax income for the residents of Eastbury who fall below the poverty line increased by 16% in the last 5 years.
b) The senator has not personally benefited from the tax cuts.
c) The number of residents of Eastbury has not substantially changed in the last two eyars
d) The federal tax rate rose 6% during the 4 years prior to the implementation of the tax cuts.
e) A recent changes in the estate laws did not substantially increase the average per capita income before-tax income of the residents of Eastbury OA is OK. But can someone explain why it cannot be C?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 27 Oct 2010
Posts: 190
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
6
[0], given: 20
|
Re: Average per capita income [#permalink]
28 Jan 2011, 10:20
I think, it can not be C because the number of residents could have been decreased causing per-capita income to increase and weaking the senator's claim.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 12 Dec 2010
Posts: 7
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 5
|
Re: Average per capita income [#permalink]
30 Jan 2011, 08:07
praveenvino,
It cannot be C because we are talking about per capita income which is the total after tax income divided by the number of people.If the number of people change or remain the same the per capita income will get automatically adjusted. This makes C irrelevant. This is IMHO.
Hope this helps!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 22 Sep 2010
Posts: 25
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
Re: Average per capita income [#permalink]
30 Jan 2011, 23:22
By POE D or E
Choose 'D' by mistake as did not read the choice D properly
'tax rate rose 6% during the 4 years prior to the implementation of the tax cuts' --> talks about period prior to tax cuts, so D is out
It should be 'E' because -- 'recent changes in the estate laws did not substantially ' -- supports the conclusion that the increase should be because of tax cuts ... basically elimination any other cause of income increase before tax that could have led to income increase after tax.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Status: Admitted
Affiliations: Chicago Booth
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 947
Followers: 10
Kudos [?]:
143
[0], given: 123
|
Re: Average per capita income [#permalink]
03 Feb 2011, 05:58
bascially no other change brought the result except the tax cuts.
C - makes the average per capital income variable- increasing or decreasing the taxes. Hence it can effect both ways
E - prevents pre taxed per capital income to go up. Hence that should be the assumption and stregthens the senator's conclusion
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Status: 2000 posts! I don't know whether I should feel great or sad about it! LOL
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 1756
Location: Peru
Schools: Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, MIT & HKS (Government)
WE 1: Economic research
WE 2: Banking
WE 3: Government: Foreign Trade and SMEs
Followers: 50
Kudos [?]:
145
[0], given: 108
|
Re: Average per capita income [#permalink]
06 May 2011, 14:05
+1 E If the per capita income before taxes has not changed, this can suggest that the higher per capita incomes after taxes are result of the tax cuts.
_________________
"Life’s battle doesn’t always go to stronger or faster men; but sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can."
My Integrated Reasoning Logbook / Diary: my-ir-logbook-diary-133264.html
Find out what's new at GMAT Club - latest features and updates
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1400
Followers: 8
Kudos [?]:
84
[0], given: 10
|
Re: Average per capita income [#permalink]
17 May 2011, 00:18
call between C and E, where C uses a slight assumption that since number of people have decreased,the after tax salary being same,per capita income has increased. avg = Sum/number of people. E clearly states that the Sum itself has increased,causing the average to increase too. Hence E.
_________________
Visit -- http://www.sustainable-sphere.com/
Promote Green Business,Sustainable Living and Green Earth !!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 21 Dec 2010
Posts: 657
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
58
[0], given: 51
|
Re: Average per capita income [#permalink]
17 May 2011, 08:12
c states 'The number of residents of Eastbury has not substantially changed in the last two years' change could mean population increased ( and despite the tax cuts, this could mean the avg.per capita income may decrease, the total income remaining same) or change could mean population decreased ( in this case avg. per capita income may increase, more with tax cuts , provided the total income of all people remained same) hence C doesnt necessarily state the truth.
_________________
What is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Average per capita income
[#permalink]
17 May 2011, 08:12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
