It is currently 21 Oct 2017, 14:37

### 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

# Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 14 Jan 2011
Posts: 27

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 3

Re: Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Aug 2014, 09:49
I think E is wrong, because it clearly states that to produce one pound of meat it takes several pounds of grain.

I think the correct answer is C.

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 3

Intern
Joined: 25 Jun 2014
Posts: 16

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 9

Schools: LBS '17, LBS MIF '16
Re: Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Aug 2014, 09:21
souvik101990 wrote:
Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both grain and meat. However, as per capita income in Gortland has risen toward the world average, per capita consumption of meat has also risen toward the world average, and it takes several pounds of grain to produce one pound of meat. Therefore, since per capita income continues to rise, whereas domestic grain production will not increase, Gortland will soon have to import either grain or meat or both.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. The total acreage devoted to grain production in Gortland will soon decrease.
B. Importing either grain or meat will not result in a significantly higher percentage of Gortlanders' incomes being spent on food than is currently the case.
C. The per capita consumption of meat in Gortland is increasing at roughly the same rate across all income levels.
D. The per capita income of meat producers in Gortland is rising faster than the per capita income of grain producers.
E. People in Gortland who increase their consumption of meat will not radically decrease their consumption of grain.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
OA: 24 hours

Reason is very logical....if you eat more meat than your consumption of grains decrease....

same is the logic here....they say because Gortlanders are eating more meat they will reduce their consumption of grains....and hence they do not need to import

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 9

Intern
Joined: 01 Sep 2014
Posts: 5

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

Re: Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Sep 2014, 00:25
Thanks to give me such useful information.

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

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10110

Kudos [?]: 263 [0], given: 0

Re: Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Sep 2014, 08:58
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.

Kudos [?]: 263 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 11 Sep 2014
Posts: 1

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

Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Sep 2014, 02:11
BeckyRobinsonTPR wrote:
This assumption question asks you to bridge the gap between the conclusion that garland will have to import meat or grain based and the premise that Meat consumption is increasing and meat uses lots of grain. Thus we will have to assume that the increase in meat consumption will mean that grain consumption either remains the same or also increases.
Hang Tuah wrote:
Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both grain and meat. However, as per capita income in Gortland has risen toward the world average, per capita consumption of meat has also risen toward the world average, and it takes several pounds of grains to produce one pound of meat. Therefore, since per capita income continues to rise, whereas domestic grain production will not increase, Gortland will soon have to import either grain or meat or both.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

(A) The total acreage devoted to grain production in Gortlnad will not decrease substantially acreage is out of scope because we don't have a connection between grain production and acreage
(B) The population of Gortland has remained relatively constant during the countryâ€™s years of growing prosperityYou do not have to assume a constant population for the income level to affect the meat consumption
(C) The per capita consumption of meat in Gortland is roughly the same across all income levelsas long as it is increasing, it doesn't matter which demographic increases more or less
(D) In Gortland, neither meat nor grain is subject to government price controlsprice controls are out of scope - as the argument makes it clear meat consumption is increasing with or without the prices
(E) People in Gortland who increase their consumption of meat will not radically decrease their consumption of grain[color=#2e3192]This is the assumption because if there were a dramatic decrease in grain then that could make up for the increase in meat consumption and therefore you have to assume this will not happen in order to come to the stated conclusion[/color]

Hello, I am new here. I know the OA is E, but I still think population is a very important factor. I thought about it over and over again and now hold a grudge against answer E. To me, the OA has at least one logical opening left for attack. See how I challenge it:

Say "people in Gortland who increase their consumption of meat will not radically decrease their consumption of grain", alright, but how about a plague started and wipes out 95% of the Gortland population? Gortland surely will need no import of neither meat nor grain for a long time. The OA, which is E, in my opinion, guarantees only the increase of per capital meat and grain consumption , but it doesn't guarantee the number of people from a radical fall, which seems an opening to me.

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

Current Student
Status: The Final Countdown
Joined: 07 Mar 2013
Posts: 293

Kudos [?]: 81 [0], given: 444

Concentration: Technology, General Management
GMAT 1: 710 Q47 V41
GPA: 3.84
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Dec 2014, 02:22
I could not understand why is option C not even relevant. The author also assumed that all kinds of people are eating more and more meat in gortland..

Kudos [?]: 81 [0], given: 444

Intern
Joined: 21 Jun 2014
Posts: 39

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 184

Re: Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2015, 12:12
1 Meat = 10 grain (it takes several pounds of grain to produce meat)
Consumption Earlier -
Meat - 100 = 1000 grain
Grain - 100
Total Grain = 1100

Choice (E)
Consumption Increase of Meat = 120 = 1200 grain
Consumption decrease of grain (Not Significant) = 90
Total = 1290

Extra = 190 (Need to Import) Leading to Conclusion that there would be need to import

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 184

Manager
Joined: 23 Aug 2013
Posts: 75

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 5

Re: Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Jun 2015, 01:17
Ralphcuisak wrote:
I could not understand why is option C not even relevant. The author also assumed that all kinds of people are eating more and more meat in gortland..

We are only concerned with the increase or decrease in meat consumption, not its increase or decrease across specific income levels. It really does not matter if only a small proportion of the population is eating meat (and contributing to its increased consumption) or if it is consumed by all sections.
_________________

Kudos would be appreciated -:) !

http://www.EnglishForEveryone.in

GMAT Prep : Critical Reasoning Decoded

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 5

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10110

Kudos [?]: 263 [0], given: 0

Re: Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Oct 2015, 05:09
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.

Kudos [?]: 263 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Oct 2015
Posts: 367

Kudos [?]: 158 [0], given: 211

Concentration: Finance, Strategy
GPA: 3.93
WE: Account Management (Education)
Re: Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2016, 13:48
I need a week lesson on this barter system. All the question on this barter system have always tricked me. Even with this explanation, internalization is yet to occur. What's fundamentally different in these barter questions?
Help!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Kudos [?]: 158 [0], given: 211

Senior Manager
Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Posts: 472

Kudos [?]: 212 [0], given: 179

Does the sentence play any role in the argument? [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2016, 01:19
Does the sentence ("it takes several pounds of grain to produce one pound of meat") play any role in the argument? i want to mean that if i remove this part from the argument, will it hamper the correct answer option E? Actually, I'm not removing anything from the original question; I'm just doing that to convince myself that I've understood the question or not.

Thanks...
_________________

“The heights by great men reached and kept were not attained in sudden flight but, they while their companions slept, they were toiling upwards in the night.”

Kudos [?]: 212 [0], given: 179

Intern
Joined: 21 Jun 2016
Posts: 4

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 51

Re: Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Jun 2016, 23:39
Negate E:
People in Gortland who increase their consumption of meat will radically decrease their consumption of grain.
the conclusion is Gortland will need to import either grain or meat or both, ==> the consumption of meat and grain will increase ==> weaken the conclusion

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 51

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10110

Kudos [?]: 263 [0], given: 0

Re: Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Sep 2016, 07:00
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.

Kudos [?]: 263 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 10 Aug 2016
Posts: 39

Kudos [?]: 32 [0], given: 28

Location: India
GMAT 1: 560 Q47 V21
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V35
WE: Supply Chain Management (Manufacturing)
Re: Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Nov 2016, 08:50
Hey folks , i found amazing explanation of this question on following link. Check it out. Nice work done by ChiranjeevSingh
http://gmatwithcj.com/solutions/critica ... ufficient/
_________________

Consider giving Kudos, if you find worth it !!

Kudos [?]: 32 [0], given: 28

Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Jan 2017
Posts: 435

Kudos [?]: 59 [0], given: 15

Location: India
Re: Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Mar 2017, 03:40
A. The total acreage devoted to grain production in Gortland will soon decrease.( Wrong Answer : Acreage devoted to grain production is nowhere discussed in the argument hence this option is irrelevant.)
B. Importing either grain or meat will not result in a significantly higher percentage of Gortlanders' incomes being spent on food than is currently the case.( Wrong Answer : The discussion of the %age of income being spent on food is not relevant to the argument.)
C. The per capita consumption of meat in Gortland is increasing at roughly the same rate across all income levels.( Wrong Answer : The distribution of per capita consumption of meat across income levels is irrelevant to the argument at hand.)
D. The per capita income of meat producers in Gortland is rising faster than the per capita income of grain producers.( Wrong Answer : No such comparison is made in the argument.
E. People in Gortland who increase their consumption of meat will not radically decrease their consumption of grain.( Right Answer : The argument assumes that the level of consumption of grain will not get affected by the increased level of consumption of meat. )

Kudos [?]: 59 [0], given: 15

Director
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 897

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 865

Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
Re: Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jun 2017, 16:52
there is a similar question in which the answer weakens the argument. Ones should be careful when they read the question and options.

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 865

VP
Status: Learning
Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Posts: 1074

Kudos [?]: 69 [1], given: 534

Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V36
GRE 1: 314 Q157 V157
GPA: 3.4
WE: Manufacturing and Production (Manufacturing)
Re: Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jun 2017, 00:51
1
KUDOS
Gives us a reason why they have to import meat and grain .
IF they consume more meat and do not decrease their consumption of grain then they will import .
_________________

We are more often frightened than hurt; and we suffer more from imagination than from reality

Kudos [?]: 69 [1], given: 534

Status: It's now or never
Joined: 10 Feb 2017
Posts: 276

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 51

Location: India
GMAT 1: 650 Q40 V39
GPA: 3
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Re: Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2017, 10:58
E is correct - The statement properly identifies the assumption that those who begin to eat meat do not then greatly decrease their direct consumption of grains.
_________________

Class of 2019: Mannheim Business School
Class 0f 2020: HHL Leipzig

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 51

Senior Manager
Joined: 26 Dec 2015
Posts: 254

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 1

Location: United States (CA)
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
WE: Investment Banking (Venture Capital)
Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Aug 2017, 20:43
You'll see it right away when you negate "E".
- (NEGATED): People in Gortland who increase their consumption of meat will radically decrease their consumption of grain.
> Remember, CONCLUSION: since per capita income continues to rise, whereas domestic grain production will not increase, Gortland will soon have to import either grain or meat or both
* BREAK CONCLUSION: What if they increased one thing (meat) but radically decreased another (grain)?

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 1

Gortland has long been narrowly self-sufficient in both   [#permalink] 30 Aug 2017, 20:43

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4   [ 79 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by