Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 30 Aug 2014, 06:43

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.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Which of the following most logically completes the passage?

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 19 Aug 2012
Posts: 18
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 15 [1] , given: 10

Which of the following most logically completes the passage? [#permalink] New post 20 Dec 2012, 22:38
1
This post received
KUDOS
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  45% (medium)

Question Stats:

41% (02:11) correct 59% (01:12) wrong based on 118 sessions
Which of the following most logically completes the passage?
Concerned about financial well-being of its elderly citizens, the government of Runagia decided two years ago to
increase by 20 percent the government-provided pension paid to all Runagians over 65. Inflation in the
intervening period has been negligible, and the increase has been duly received by all eligible Runagians.
Nevertheless, many of them are no better off financially than they were before the increase, in large part
because ________.
A. They rely entirely on the government pension for their income
B. Runagian banks are so inefficient that it can take up to three weeks to cash a pension check
C. They buy goods whose prices tend to rise especially fast in times of inflation
D. The pension was increased when the number of elderly Runagians below the poverty level reached an all-time
high
E. In Runagia children typically supplement the income of elderly parents, but only by enough to provide them with
a comfortable living

Please provide your reasoning with the answer.. not sure why the answer is what it is..
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
9 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
User avatar
Status: Edge of Extinction
Joined: 09 Sep 2012
Posts: 40
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 16 [9] , given: 29

Re: Complete the argument - confusing reasoning.. [#permalink] New post 21 Dec 2012, 00:01
9
This post received
KUDOS
Which of the following most logically completes the passage?
Concerned about financial well-being of its elderly citizens, the government of Runagia decided two years ago to increase by 20 percent the government-provided pension paid to all Runagians over 65. Inflation in the intervening period has been negligible, and the increase has been duly received by all eligible Runagians. Nevertheless, many of them are no better off financially than they were before the increase, in large part because ________.


A. They rely entirely on the government pension for their income. If they relied entirely on pension for their income, they would be better off financially. Ex: $200 before, $ 240 now. So better off. Incorrect.

B. Runagian banks are so inefficient that it can take up to three weeks to cash a pension check. With the increase, the pensioners are better off, because getting an amount late doesn't mean the receiver is worse off. The amount is coming in at set intervals. Ex: $200 3 weeks late before, $240 3 weeks late now. So better off. Incorrect.

C. They buy goods whose prices tend to rise especially fast in times of inflation. Even assuming the prices of goods the pensioners buy rise faster than inflation (which is negligible), this still doesn't indicate that the rise in cost of goods they buy definitely nullified the 20% rise in pension they got 2 years ago. Incorrect.

D. The pension was increased when the number of elderly Runagians below the poverty level reached an all-time high. Has no relationship to pensioners not being better off today than they were before the 20% rise in pensions. Incorrect.

E. In Runagia children typically supplement the income of elderly parents, but only by enough to provide them with a comfortable living. Bingo! Children would decrease their support if the pensions increased, thereby the pensioners would be no better off than they were before the pension increase. Ex: $200 before ($100 pension, $100 children), $200 now ($120 pension, $80 children). Correct.

Remember: No better off financially means: Financially worse off OR at the same level.

Hope this helped. Thanks for sharing. :)
_________________

The only ability the GMAT is an indicator of...is the ability to do well on the GMAT.

2 KUDOS received
VP
VP
avatar
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1096
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Followers: 32

Kudos [?]: 254 [2] , given: 67

Re: Complete the argument - confusing reasoning.. [#permalink] New post 21 Dec 2012, 10:17
2
This post received
KUDOS
Zenverse wrote:
Which of the following most logically completes the passage?
Concerned about financial well-being of its elderly citizens, the government of Runagia decided two years ago to increase by 20 percent the government-provided pension paid to all Runagians over 65. Inflation in the intervening period has been negligible, and the increase has been duly received by all eligible Runagians. Nevertheless, many of them are no better off financially than they were before the increase, in large part because ________.


A. They rely entirely on the government pension for their income. If they relied entirely on pension for their income, they would be better off financially. Ex: $200 before, $ 240 now. So better off. Incorrect.

B. Runagian banks are so inefficient that it can take up to three weeks to cash a pension check. With the increase, the pensioners are better off, because getting an amount late doesn't mean the receiver is worse off. The amount is coming in at set intervals. Ex: $200 3 weeks late before, $240 3 weeks late now. So better off. Incorrect.

C. They buy goods whose prices tend to rise especially fast in times of inflation. Even assuming the prices of goods the pensioners buy rise faster than inflation (which is negligible), this still doesn't indicate that the rise in cost of goods they buy definitely nullified the 20% rise in pension they got 2 years ago. Incorrect.

D. The pension was increased when the number of elderly Runagians below the poverty level reached an all-time high. Has no relationship to pensioners not being better off today than they were before the 20% rise in pensions. Incorrect.

E. In Runagia children typically supplement the income of elderly parents, but only by enough to provide them with a comfortable living. Bingo! Children would decrease their support if the pensions increased, thereby the pensioners would be no better off than they were before the pension increase. Ex: $200 before ($100 pension, $100 children), $200 now ($120 pension, $80 children). Correct.

Remember: No better off financially means: Financially worse off OR at the same level.

Hope this helped. Thanks for sharing. :)


Good Explanation Zen..........
really tough question.....Hey can you pls specify the source of the question.........
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 19 Aug 2012
Posts: 18
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 10

Re: Complete the argument - confusing reasoning.. [#permalink] New post 21 Dec 2012, 19:54
Zenverse wrote:
Which of the following most logically completes the passage?
Concerned about financial well-being of its elderly citizens, the government of Runagia decided two years ago to increase by 20 percent the government-provided pension paid to all Runagians over 65. Inflation in the intervening period has been negligible, and the increase has been duly received by all eligible Runagians. Nevertheless, many of them are no better off financially than they were before the increase, in large part because ________.


A. They rely entirely on the government pension for their income. If they relied entirely on pension for their income, they would be better off financially. Ex: $200 before, $ 240 now. So better off. Incorrect.

B. Runagian banks are so inefficient that it can take up to three weeks to cash a pension check. With the increase, the pensioners are better off, because getting an amount late doesn't mean the receiver is worse off. The amount is coming in at set intervals. Ex: $200 3 weeks late before, $240 3 weeks late now. So better off. Incorrect.

C. They buy goods whose prices tend to rise especially fast in times of inflation. Even assuming the prices of goods the pensioners buy rise faster than inflation (which is negligible), this still doesn't indicate that the rise in cost of goods they buy definitely nullified the 20% rise in pension they got 2 years ago. Incorrect.

D. The pension was increased when the number of elderly Runagians below the poverty level reached an all-time high. Has no relationship to pensioners not being better off today than they were before the 20% rise in pensions. Incorrect.

E. In Runagia children typically supplement the income of elderly parents, but only by enough to provide them with a comfortable living. Bingo! Children would decrease their support if the pensions increased, thereby the pensioners would be no better off than they were before the pension increase. Ex: $200 before ($100 pension, $100 children), $200 now ($120 pension, $80 children). Correct.

Remember: No better off financially means: Financially worse off OR at the same level.

Hope this helped. Thanks for sharing. :)



I think i get it now.. the last option clearly states that if the parents were getting $100 before for "comfortable living" from their children and the pension provided them $20 after the increase, the overall income would STILL REMAIN $100 as the children would now only supplement the income with $80.

Sounds good mate! cheers for the detailed reply!
SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 1721
Followers: 236

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 0

Premium Member
Re: Which of the following most logically completes the passage? [#permalink] New post 22 Jan 2014, 08:27
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.
Re: Which of the following most logically completes the passage?   [#permalink] 22 Jan 2014, 08:27
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Which of the following most logically completes the passage? x97agarwal 2 02 Aug 2008, 20:02
Which of the following most logically completes the passage? Puilunchristin 11 16 Jan 2006, 11:18
Which of the following most logically completes the passage? okdongdong 20 21 Jul 2005, 06:00
Which of the following most logically completes the passage? karun_aggarwal 15 13 Apr 2005, 14:35
Which of the following most logically completes the passage? chunjuwu 12 01 Feb 2005, 06:09
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Which of the following most logically completes the passage?

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


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®.