According to those in favour of privatisation of Social Security in th

Question

According to those in favour of privatisation of Social Security in the US, the current system is impossible to sustain. Decades ago, there were many more workers for every recipient but now the situation has reversed. Sooner or later, the fund will not be able to meet its obligations, because there will be more payments going out, than income coming in. Privatizing the system for the future recipients, while gradually phasing out the system for current and near-term recipients, is probably the best way to keep the system viable.

The answer to which of the following questions would be most useful in determining whether privatization of Social Security in the US would be a good idea?

(A) Whether privatization has proved successful for other government provided services such as employee provident funds

(B) Whether the population of the US is likely to increase significantly in the future

(C) Whether the growth in the number of workers is the US is likely to outstrip the growth in the number of dependents in the future

(D) Whether privatization of social security will lead to large scale protests by US citizens

(E) Whether taking loans can help the Social Security system tide over the problem of the reduction in funds coming in to the system

This question is a part of QOTD Question Collection

deenesh2309 · Accepted Answer

Answer is C
The author assumes that social security contributors will be outnumbered soon by recipient and hence there is need of privatization.
This argument is only valid if there is possibility of such event.

C) Whether the growth in the number of workers is the US is likely to outstrip the growth in the number of dependents in the future
If Ans is Yes for near future, then privatization needed.
If Ans is No for near future, then keep the existing system.

Kudos please, if it helped.

nahid78 · Answer

privatizing is considered because of the fund problem, So If loan can help society about the fund, then I think E is the correct answer.

deep14 · Answer

Ans is C because, according to the critics, that is the exact reason why privatization will not be successful in current scenario

Posted from my mobile device

winionhi · Answer

Since the real problem is between the difference between the outward and inward funds, it is essential to understand the growth in the number of people in each of those categories. C speaks of that.

nahid78 · Answer

Ok I understand C is the right answer. But what's wrong with E? Is it out of scope or not related to the conclusion?

pikolo2510 · Answer

Hello Experts,

Can anyone explain the difference between C and E?

sunny91 · Answer

Can anyone explain options c and e
Also, in option c, what does the number of dependents in the future refer to?
I am having a hard time to comprehend option c
(C) Whether the growth in the number of workers is the US is likely to outstrip the growth in the number of dependents in the future

TaN1213 · Answer

E suggests to take loans to meet the shortage of funds. But the premise is already stating -"  Sooner or later , the fund will not be able to meet its obligations", which would mean while taking loans might help in addressing the short term problem, later the same problem is going to arise.

C-  Whether the growth in the number of workers is the US is likely to outstrip the growth in the number of dependents in the future 
 Explanation - The issue with current system is because of not being able to maintain a fixed ratio between the workers and recipients. 
 " Decades ago, there were many more workers for every recipient.. " - Example 3 workers for 1 client (many to one relationship)- 3:1
 " ....but now the situation has reversed ." - Now the ratio is reversed - 1 worker for many client- 1:3 (one to many relationship)
So  if the number of workers exceed the number of clients in future  the situation can again get stable, like it was a decade ago.This would suggest that we wont have to proceed with the privatization of Social Security in the US. 
But if the answer is No to 'C', then we will have to go with the privatization.

chesstitans · Answer

boiled down to A and C.
E is an important pattern b/c E suggests another solution. Also, such pattern often is out of scopes in many question b/c the pattern discusses sth else that is not directly linked with the argument.

Shivikaa · Answer

Can someone explain why A isn't the answer ?

gmatexam439 · Answer

According to those in favour of privatisation of Social Security in the US, the current system is impossible to sustain. Decades ago, there were many more workers for every recipient but now the situation has reversed. Sooner or later, the fund will not be able to meet its obligations, because there will be more payments going out, than income coming in. Privatizing the system for the future recipients, while gradually phasing out the system for current and near-term recipients, is probably the best way to keep the system viable.

The answer to which of the following questions would be most useful in determining whether privatization of Social Security in the US would be a good idea?

(A) Whether privatization has proved successful for other government provided services such as employee provident funds - Other funds are out of scope 
(B) Whether the population of the US is likely to increase significantly in the future - Out of scope 
(C) Whether the growth in the number of workers is the US is likely to outstrip the growth in the number of dependents in the future - Correct. If the income earning people become more in number than the payments going out (dependants) people, then the problem can be resolved. 
(D) Whether privatization of social security will lead to large scale protests by US citizens - Protests are out of scope 
(E) Whether taking loans can help the Social Security system tide over the problem of the reduction in funds coming in to the system - Taking loans will eventually lead to payment of debt. Thus, this can't be a good evaluation tool.

dcummins · Answer

(C) tries to throw you off with the synonym "dependents" in place of "recipients, which is used in the stem.

prakhar992 · Answer

Can you explain how to eliminate option E?

jaisonsunny77 · Answer

the summary of the passage is as follows:

Current social security system is impossible to sustain because as things stand, the number of dependents of the fund is increasing, whereas the #of providers to the fund is decreasing. Privatizing the fund by phasing out the old system will make Social security more viable in the future. 
  
(A) Whether privatization has proved successful for other government provided services such as employee provident funds  -  what may be true for other government services may not be applicable to the Social security system.  
 
(B) Whether the population of the US is likely to increase significantly in the future  -  (B) does not tell us whether the number of dependents/providers of (to) the funds is decreasing or increasing. Without knowing the answer to this question, we cannot arrive at the conclusion. 
 
(C) Whether the growth in the number of workers is the US is likely to outstrip the growth in the number of dependents in the future - if the answer to this question is no, then we can infer that there would be more providers to the fund than dependents. This would improve the situation of the fund. But if the answer is yes, then it would imply that privatization of the current social security system would lead to a shortage of funds since there will now be more dependents than fund providers. Hence, (C) will hep us determine whether the privatization of Social Security in the US would be a good idea. therefore,   (C) is the right answer choice.   
 
(D) Whether privatization of social security will lead to large scale protests by US citizens  -  irrelevant to the passage 
  
(E) Whether taking loans can help the Social Security system tide over the problem of the reduction in funds coming in to the system  -  the passage is concerned with whether the privatization of Social Security in the US would be a good idea. In this context, ''loans'' is irrelevant.

Bunuel · Answer

Official Explanation

Answer: C

The argument assumes that in the US the number of dependents in the future will be far more than the number of earning workers, a situation that will lead to the social security funds drying up. However, if this assumption is not true, then the Social Security system could continue working as it has been over the years. C points out this fact and is the correct answer.

(A) Whether privatization has proved successful for other services has no bearing on whether privatization will work for the Social Security system.

(B) The problem is not the population growth rate but the ratio between earners and dependents. As long as this ratio remains favourable, an increase in population should not make any difference.

(C) The correct answer.

(D) This is not the basis of the argument’s conclusion.

(E) Taking loans can provide a short-term solution but the problem will remain in the long term.

KrishivA · Answer

E is not the  most  useful question. It is relevant, but not as relevant as C, which directly addresses the point.

According to those in favour of privatisation of Social Security in th

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

According to those in favour of privatisation of Social Security in th

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards