Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Jul 1508:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Full-length FE mock with insightful analytics, weakness diagnosis, and video explanations!
Jul 1609:30 AM EDT
-11:30 AM EDT
Is INSEAD your dream b-school and you're looking for solid prep and application strategies to get there? Check out Barkavi’s end-to-end journey to know how she did! Get insights into the INSEAD admissions process, know what Adcoms look at, and more!
Jul 1611:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
Jul 0901:00 PM EDT
-02:00 PM EDT
More Target Test Prep students are earning 100th percentile GMAT scores. Don’t settle for less when the Target Test Prep course gives you everything you need to score high on the GMAT. Start your 5-day free trial today.- Jul 14
10:00 AM PDT
-11:59 PM PDT
GMAT Preparation Online - A limited time sale use code: EXPERTSGLOBAL10 
Jul 1911:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment
Jul 1911:30 AM EDT
-12:30 PM EDT
Struggling to find the right strategies to score a 99 %ile on GMAT Focus? Riya (GMAT 715) boosted her score by 100-points in just 15 days! Discover how the right mentorship, tailored strategies, and an unwavering mindset can transform your GMAT prep.
Updated on: 28 Dec 2017, 10:20
Originally posted by AkshayKS21 on 16 Jun 2017, 05:31.
Last edited by broall on 28 Dec 2017, 10:20, edited 2 times in total.
Last edited by broall on 28 Dec 2017, 10:20, edited 2 times in total.
Reformatted question
Kudos
Bookmarks
C
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
45%
(medium)
Question Stats:
70% (02:00) correct
30%
(02:28)
wrong
based on 2513
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Editorial: In Ledland, unemployed adults receive government assistance. To reduce unemployment, the government proposes to supplement the income of those who accept jobs that pay less than government assistance, thus enabling employers to hire workers cheaply. However, the supplement will not raise any worker's income above what government assistance would provide if he or she were not gainfully employed. Therefore, unemployed people will have no financial incentive to accept jobs that would entitle them to the supplement.
Which of the following, if true about Ledland, most seriously weakens the argument of the editorial?
(A) The government collects no taxes on assistance it provides to unemployed individuals and their families.
(B) Neighboring countries with laws that mandate the minimum wage an employer must pay an employee have higher unemployment rates than Ledland currently has.
(C) At any given time, people who are currently employed have the best chance of being offered a job that will give them an income significantly greater than government assistance would give them.
(D) The financial assistance that the government provides to people who have no other income is less than the average starting wage.
(E) People sometimes choose a job for reasons that have nothing to do with the financial benefits it offers.
Same passage with different stem question: LINK
Which of the following, if true about Ledland, most seriously weakens the argument of the editorial?
(A) The government collects no taxes on assistance it provides to unemployed individuals and their families.
(B) Neighboring countries with laws that mandate the minimum wage an employer must pay an employee have higher unemployment rates than Ledland currently has.
(C) At any given time, people who are currently employed have the best chance of being offered a job that will give them an income significantly greater than government assistance would give them.
(D) The financial assistance that the government provides to people who have no other income is less than the average starting wage.
(E) People sometimes choose a job for reasons that have nothing to do with the financial benefits it offers.
Same passage with different stem question: LINK
I faced this question in GMATPrep Exam 3, but the answer choices were quite different from what stated here.
Attached is image for reference.
Needless to say, I got it wrong
LedlandUnemployed.jpg [ 293.07 KiB | Viewed 24549 times ]
Attached is image for reference.
Needless to say, I got it wrong
Attachment:
LedlandUnemployed.jpg [ 293.07 KiB | Viewed 24549 times ]
10 May 2019, 12:49
Kudos
Bookmarks
AkshayKS21
Editorial: In Ledland, unemployed adults receive government assistance. To reduce unemployment, the government proposes to supplement the income of those who accept jobs that pay less than government assistance, thus enabling employers to hire workers cheaply. However, the supplement will not raise any worker's income above what government assistance would provide if he or she were not gainfully employed. Therefore, unemployed people will have no financial incentive to accept jobs that would entitle them to the supplement.
Which of the following, if true about Ledland, most seriously weakens the argument of the editorial?
(A) The government collects no taxes on assistance it provides to unemployed individuals and their families.
(B) Neighboring countries with laws that mandate the minimum wage an employer must pay an employee have higher unemployment rates than Ledland currently has.
(C) At any given time, people who are currently employed have the best chance of being offered a job that will give them an income significantly greater than government assistance would give them.
(D) The financial assistance that the government provides to people who have no other income is less than the average starting wage.
(E) People sometimes choose a job for reasons that have nothing to do with the financial benefits it offers.
Same passage with different stem question: LINK
Which of the following, if true about Ledland, most seriously weakens the argument of the editorial?
(A) The government collects no taxes on assistance it provides to unemployed individuals and their families.
(B) Neighboring countries with laws that mandate the minimum wage an employer must pay an employee have higher unemployment rates than Ledland currently has.
(C) At any given time, people who are currently employed have the best chance of being offered a job that will give them an income significantly greater than government assistance would give them.
(D) The financial assistance that the government provides to people who have no other income is less than the average starting wage.
(E) People sometimes choose a job for reasons that have nothing to do with the financial benefits it offers.
Same passage with different stem question: LINK
I faced this question in GMATPrep Exam 3, but the answer choices were quite different from what stated here.
Attached is image for reference.
Needless to say, I got it wrong :P
Attached is image for reference.
Needless to say, I got it wrong :P
Attachment:
LedlandUnemployed.jpg
Hi Ritwick91 (and sayan640 ) - Happy to chime in here!
In this argument, we draw the conclusion that "unemployed people will have no financial incentive to accept jobs that would entitle them to the supplement" basically because according to the argument - the incentive would be a wash - as it would make up for any amount below unemployment - but nothing beyond that point. So, individuals wouldn't be financially incentivized to take on jobs that would (after the supplement) pay the same amount as unemployment.
Answer choice (C) gives us a reason the incentive may be helpful despite this - as it would allow individuals to take on lower-paying jobs in hopes of advancing to higher paying jobs, without risking taking on a job that pays below the unemployment level. So, despite not bringing the individuals to a higher pay level than unemployment - it puts them in a position to obtain a higher paying job without the disadvantage of a lower-than-unemployment job in the meantime. This provides a financial incentive to said individuals.
Answer choice (D) on the other hand, doesn't matter to us, since it is irrelevant to those who would earn above the unemployment assistance level, and for those who earn below that level - it is a wash (as mentioned above). So, it doesn't weaken the conclusion that "unemployed people will have no financial incentive to accept jobs that would entitle them to the supplement" - since to do so, we need a reason unemployed people might have some financial incentive to accept jobs that would entitle them to the supplement. (C) gives this to us, while (D) does not.
I hope this helps!
22 Nov 2017, 05:04
Kudos
Bookmarks
GMATNinja
Please review my reasoning for eliminating option D:
Let's assign numbers to the scenario mentioned in the argument:
1. Current income of unemployed adults: $0
2. Government assistance provided to unemployed adults: $100
3. Salary of Jobs below the government supplement: $60
5. New Government assistance: $40
Option D : The financial assistance that the government provides ($40) to people who have no other income is less than the average starting wage ($60).
SO WHAT ? The sum total of what the unemployed people get under the new scheme is still $100. It strengthens the conclusion of the argument that THERE IS NO FINANCIAL INCENTIVE BECAUSE THE PEOPLE STILL GET $100 in total
Hence, we can eliminate option D
Please review my reasoning for eliminating option D:
Let's assign numbers to the scenario mentioned in the argument:
1. Current income of unemployed adults: $0
2. Government assistance provided to unemployed adults: $100
3. Salary of Jobs below the government supplement: $60
5. New Government assistance: $40
Option D : The financial assistance that the government provides ($40) to people who have no other income is less than the average starting wage ($60).
SO WHAT ? The sum total of what the unemployed people get under the new scheme is still $100. It strengthens the conclusion of the argument that THERE IS NO FINANCIAL INCENTIVE BECAUSE THE PEOPLE STILL GET $100 in total
Hence, we can eliminate option D
