It is currently 22 Nov 2017, 22:58

### 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

# Although it may seem to be counterintuitive, a country must

Author Message
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4284

Kudos [?]: 537 [0], given: 0

Although it may seem to be counterintuitive, a country must [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jun 2004, 16:44
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (01:40) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Although it may seem to be counterintuitive, a country must reduce poverty and hunger concurrent with a reduction in the death rate if it hopes not to suffer a major growth in population. Poor and hungry people will feel the need to have many children until infant mortality decreases as the result of the benefits of economic growth.

This argument would be weakened if it could be shown that
A) poverty and hunger do not necessarily account for a country's death rate
B) most large families consist of four different generations
C) infant mortality is not the primary reason for having many children
D) the rate of infant mortality need not increase when the death rate increases
E) in most wealthy countries, the benefits of economic growth are differentially distributed across the population
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

Kudos [?]: 537 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 81

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: Poverty and hunger [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jun 2004, 17:33
Paul wrote:
Although it may seem to be counterintuitive, a country must reduce poverty and hunger concurrent with a reduction in the death rate if it hopes not to suffer a major growth in population. Poor and hungry people will feel the need to have many children until infant mortality decreases as the result of the benefits of economic growth.

This argument would be weakened if it could be shown that
A) poverty and hunger do not necessarily account for a country's death rate
B) most large families consist of four different generations
C) infant mortality is not the primary reason for having many children
D) the rate of infant mortality need not increase when the death rate increases
E) in most wealthy countries, the benefits of economic growth are differentially distributed across the population

I will go with C.

I think the direction of the argument is as the following:

poverty and hunger ===> the desire of having many children because of infant mortality ====> major growth in population.

So the argument could be attacked from the point that "Poor and hungry people will feel the need to have many children until infant mortality decreases".

Correct me if I am mistaken.

Good luck
_________________

-Genius is one percent inspiration, and ninety-nine percent perspiration.

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Mar 2004
Posts: 445

Kudos [?]: 76 [0], given: 0

Location: Cary,NC

### Show Tags

30 Jun 2004, 18:10
I agree with C.

reduce(poverty,hunger,death rate) ===> reduce(pop growth)

high(infant death rate) =>poor people want more children => high(pop)

So, if infant death rate is not the main reason for having children, the premise is weakened.

A. poverty and hunger are not related to death rate
B. Out of scope - OOS
D. doesn't sound logical. It is infant mortality that affects the death rate.
E. Again OOS

- ash
_________________

ash
________________________
I'm crossing the bridge.........

Kudos [?]: 76 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 11 Jun 2004
Posts: 2

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

### Show Tags

01 Jul 2004, 00:40

Thanks.

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

Manager
Joined: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 81

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

01 Jul 2004, 01:42
Skeletor1 wrote:

Thanks.

A) poverty and hunger do not necessarily account for a country's death rate.

The argument indicates that a country must reduce poverty and hunger concurrent with a reduction in the death rate if it hopes not to suffer a major growth in population, which means that the country must reduce both poverty and hunger and death rate as well, the argument did not indicate any relationship between "poverty and hunger" and "death rate". hence, "A" is wrong. I hope that will help.
_________________

-Genius is one percent inspiration, and ninety-nine percent perspiration.

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4284

Kudos [?]: 537 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

01 Jul 2004, 09:52
OA is C. You guys are good
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

Kudos [?]: 537 [0], given: 0

01 Jul 2004, 09:52
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Although it may seem to be counterintuitive, a country must

Moderators: GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne 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®.