|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 25 Nov 2004
Posts: 1582
Followers: 4
Kudos [?]:
13
[0], given: 0
|
To avoid economic collapse, Russia must increase its GNP by [#permalink]
 20 Apr 2005, 22:52
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions
To avoid economic collapse, Russia must increase its GNP by 20%. However, due to the structure of its economy, if the 20% threshold is reached, then a 40% increase in GNP is achievable.
Assuming that the above statements are true, which one of the following must also be true?
(A) If ethnic strife continues in Russia, then a 20% increase in GNP will be unattainable.
(B) If a 40% increase in Russia's GNP is impossible, its economy will collapse.
(C) If Russia's GNP increases by 40%, its economy will not collapse.
(D) If the 20% threshold is reached, then a 40% increase in GNP is achievable and a 60% increase is probable.
(E) If Russia's economy collapses, then it will not have increased its GNP by 40%.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1255
Location: Taiwan
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR: Russian Economy [#permalink]
20 Apr 2005, 23:23
MA wrote: To avoid economic collapse, Russia must increase its GNP by 20%. However, due to the structure of its economy, if the 20% threshold is reached, then a 40% increase in GNP is achievable.
Assuming that the above statements are true, which one of the following must also be true?
(A) If ethnic strife continues in Russia, then a 20% increase in GNP will be unattainable.
(B) If a 40% increase in Russia's GNP is impossible, its economy will collapse.
(C) If Russia's GNP increases by 40%, its economy will not collapse.
(D) If the 20% threshold is reached, then a 40% increase in GNP is achievable and a 60% increase is probable.
(E) If Russia's economy collapses, then it will not have increased its GNP by 40%.
go for E
I think it's 'only if' pattern.
economic doesn't collapse --> must increase its GNP by 20%(a 40% increase in GNP is achievable)
if economic collapses --> must not increase its GNP by 40%
Oh, must remember myself fault.
if A then B <> if no A, then no B.
if A then B == if no B, then no A.
Last edited by chunjuwu on 25 Apr 2005, 04:29, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5134
Location: Singapore
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
87
[0], given: 0
|
1) To avoid economic collapes, Russia MUST increase GNP by 20%.
2) Due to structure of its economy, if 20% threshold is reached, then a 40% increase in GNP is achievable.
Assuming that the above statements are true, which one of the following must also be true?
(A) If ethnic strife continues in Russia, then a 20% increase in GNP will be unattainable.
- Not sure how ethnic strife comes into the picture. A is out.
(B) If a 40% increase in Russia's GNP is impossible, its economy will collapse.
- Not nescessarily. We're told the GNP of 40% is achieveblae. Nothing about whether it's possible or not.
(C) If Russia's GNP increases by 40%, its economy will not collapse.
- This is the one. To increase by 40%, it must have reached the 20% threshold and so the economy will not collaspe.
(D) If the 20% threshold is reached, then a 40% increase in GNP is achievable and a 60% increase is probable.
- Out. We do not know what's probably, could be any percentage.
(E) If Russia's economy collapses, then it will not have increased its GNP by 40%.
- No. It could have reached teh 20% threshold, but did not achieve the 40% mrk.
C it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1255
Location: Taiwan
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 0
|
ywilfred wrote: 1) To avoid economic collapes, Russia MUST increase GNP by 20%.
2) Due to structure of its economy, if 20% threshold is reached, then a 40% increase in GNP is achievable.
Assuming that the above statements are true, which one of the following must also be true?
(A) If ethnic strife continues in Russia, then a 20% increase in GNP will be unattainable.
- Not sure how ethnic strife comes into the picture. A is out.
(B) If a 40% increase in Russia's GNP is impossible, its economy will collapse.
- Not nescessarily. We're told the GNP of 40% is achieveblae. Nothing about whether it's possible or not.
(C) If Russia's GNP increases by 40%, its economy will not collapse.
- This is the one. To increase by 40%, it must have reached the 20% threshold and so the economy will not collaspe.
(D) If the 20% threshold is reached, then a 40% increase in GNP is achievable and a 60% increase is probable.
- Out. We do not know what's probably, could be any percentage.
(E) If Russia's economy collapses, then it will not have increased its GNP by 40%.
- No. It could have reached teh 20% threshold, but did not achieve the 40% mrk.
C it is.
Hi, I think it's a bit of weird.
In the passage:
To avoid economic collapse, Russia must increase its GNP by 20%.
but if Russia increase its GNP by 20%, its economic may or may not collapse.
In other words, even if it increase its GNP by 40%, we still cannot reach the absolute result.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 19 Feb 2005
Posts: 508
Location: Milan Italy
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 0
|
I think "increase in GNP" is a necessary but not sufficient condition.
So E prevails.
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5134
Location: Singapore
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
87
[0], given: 0
|
chunjuwu wrote: ywilfred wrote: 1) To avoid economic collapes, Russia MUST increase GNP by 20%.
2) Due to structure of its economy, if 20% threshold is reached, then a 40% increase in GNP is achievable.
Assuming that the above statements are true, which one of the following must also be true?
(A) If ethnic strife continues in Russia, then a 20% increase in GNP will be unattainable.
- Not sure how ethnic strife comes into the picture. A is out.
(B) If a 40% increase in Russia's GNP is impossible, its economy will collapse.
- Not nescessarily. We're told the GNP of 40% is achieveblae. Nothing about whether it's possible or not.
(C) If Russia's GNP increases by 40%, its economy will not collapse.
- This is the one. To increase by 40%, it must have reached the 20% threshold and so the economy will not collaspe.
(D) If the 20% threshold is reached, then a 40% increase in GNP is achievable and a 60% increase is probable.
- Out. We do not know what's probably, could be any percentage.
(E) If Russia's economy collapses, then it will not have increased its GNP by 40%.
- No. It could have reached teh 20% threshold, but did not achieve the 40% mrk.
C it is. Hi, I think it's a bit of weird. In the passage: To avoid economic collapse, Russia must increase its GNP by 20%. but if Russia increase its GNP by 20%, its economic may or may not collapse. In other words, even if it increase its GNP by 40%, we still cannot reach the absolute result. What the passage is saying:
To avoid economy collaspe, Russia's GNP must be raised by 20%.
So if their GNP is raised only by 19.9%, the economy will collaspe.
Then it says if the GNP does managed to be raised to 20%, then there is a possibility that the GNP could go up and hit 40%.
In C, we're told that Russia's GNP increases by 40%. To be able to even achieve this, it must first reach the 20% threshold, and this is the only condition that will prevent an economy collaspe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 18 Feb 2005
Posts: 720
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 0
|
C for me...
If it reaches 20% it would avoid collapse and also it may even streach the percentage to 40%....
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Posts: 1089
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
5
[0], given: 0
|
I pick C
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 1544
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
9
[0], given: 0
|
"B"
stem...If 20% not achieved (no X )----> then Y (economy collapse) ---(1)
Also ....If 20% is achieved (X)----> then 40% is possible (Z)
so.....If no Z (40% not possible) --> then no X (20% is not achieved) --(2)
From 1 and 2
If no Z (40% not possible) ----> then Y (economy collapse)...that's what "B" is saying.
"C" is out becose 20% is a necessary but may or may not be a sufficient condition to avoid collapse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 30 Sep 2004
Posts: 1548
Location: Germany
Followers: 4
Kudos [?]:
15
[0], given: 0
|
go with E)...
B) should be out because the economy can reach the 20% and NOT the 40% and the economy will not collapse
C) should be out because it still could collapse in the future.
_________________
If your mind can conceive it and your heart can believe it, have faith that you can achieve it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1963
Location: NewJersey USA
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
25
[0], given: 0
|
if A then B
so
if not A then not B
Minimum requirement is 20% increase.
if economy collapses then it must be true that the GNP didnt increase by 20% (which means it didnt increase more than 40%)
definitely (E).
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 1544
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
9
[0], given: 0
|
anandnk wrote: if A then B
so
if not A then not B
Minimum requirement is 20% increase.
if economy collapses then it must be true that the GNP didnt increase by 20% (which means it didnt increase more than 40%)
definitely (E).
I disagree with u here Anand....I think 20% increase is the required condition but not sufficient one.....economy can still collapse even with a 20% increase.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 30 Sep 2004
Posts: 1548
Location: Germany
Followers: 4
Kudos [?]:
15
[0], given: 0
|
banerjeea_98 wrote: anandnk wrote: if A then B
so
if not A then not B
Minimum requirement is 20% increase.
if economy collapses then it must be true that the GNP didnt increase by 20% (which means it didnt increase more than 40%)
definitely (E). I disagree with u here Anand....I think 20% increase is the required condition but not sufficient one.....economy can still collapse even with a 20% increase. baner, how can B) be true when the economy do not pass the 40%, but rests at 20% ? then the economy won`t collapse and the increase of 40% was not reached ("impossible"). the situation (no collapse) lasts with or without the passing of 40%.
_________________
If your mind can conceive it and your heart can believe it, have faith that you can achieve it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 1544
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
9
[0], given: 0
|
Christoph, we need to realize that "B" is not talking abt if 40% is not reached , it is talking abt if 40% is impossible ....two different things....as the stem says ......if 20% threshold is reached then 40% is possible....that means if 40% is impossible then 20% threshold is not reached (if X, then Y concept) , hence the collapse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 30 Sep 2004
Posts: 1548
Location: Germany
Followers: 4
Kudos [?]:
15
[0], given: 0
|
banerjeea_98 wrote: Christoph, we need to realize that "B" is not talking abt if 40% is not reached , it is talking abt if 40% is impossible ....two different things....as the stem says ......if 20% threshold is reached then 40% is possible....that means if 40% is impossible then 20% threshold is not reached (if X, then Y concept) , hence the collapse.
you are right...it is B) 
_________________
If your mind can conceive it and your heart can believe it, have faith that you can achieve it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 30 Sep 2004
Posts: 1548
Location: Germany
Followers: 4
Kudos [?]:
15
[0], given: 0
|
my first vote was wrong because E) cannot be true because the economy could still collapse for some other reason...
_________________
If your mind can conceive it and your heart can believe it, have faith that you can achieve it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 259
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
MA - what's the OA ??
I seem to be lost in the jungle of words.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1963
Location: NewJersey USA
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
25
[0], given: 0
|
banerjeea_98 wrote:
I disagree with u here Anand....I think 20% increase is the required condition but not sufficient one.....economy can still collapse even with a 20% increase.
Hi
I agree with you. (B) should be it.
Anand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 25 Nov 2004
Posts: 1582
Followers: 4
Kudos [?]:
13
[0], given: 0
|
anandnk wrote: banerjeea_98 wrote: I disagree with u here Anand....I think 20% increase is the required condition but not sufficient one.....economy can still collapse even with a 20% increase. Hi I agree with you. (B) should be it. Anand. I also agree with you guys. OA is B.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 05 Jul 2004
Posts: 993
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
8
[0], given: 0
|
Agree with Banerjee.. It is (B).
A - avoid economic Collapse
B - 20% increase
C - 40 % increase
Question Stem => If A, then B and if B then C
=> NO C -> NO B -> NO A
A) Irrelevent
B) No C -> No A CORRECT LOGIC
C) C -> A Wrong Logic
D) B -> C -> D Wrong
E) Not A -> Not C Wrong Logic
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
