GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

It is currently 05 Apr 2020, 15:24

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 15 Jan 2018
Posts: 66
In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Aug 2019, 14:49
1
hazelnut wrote:
The Official Guide for GMAT Review 2018

Practice Question
Question No.: CR 635

In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 percent of drivers ages 21-24 were in serious accidents. By contrast, only 3 percent of licensed drivers 65 and older were involved in serious accidents. These figures clearly show that the greater experience and developed habits of caution possessed by drivers in the 65-and-older group make them far safer behind the wheel than the younger drivers are.

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

(A) Drivers 65 and older do not, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.

(B) Drivers 65 and older do not constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do.

(C) Drivers 65 and older are less likely than are drivers 24 and younger to drive during weather conditions that greatly increase the risk of accidents.

(D) The difference between the accident rate of drivers under 21 and of those ages 21-24 is attributable to the greater driving experience of those in the older group.

(E) There is no age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older.

Wareland Accidents

Step 1: Identify the Question

The word assumption in the question stem indicates that this is a Find the Assumption question.

Step 2: Deconstruct the Argument

Accident Rates

<21 – 16%

21-24 – 11%

≥65 – 3%

© Exper + caution ≥65 -> safer drivers

Step 3: Pause and State the Goal

On an Assumption question, you are looking for a piece of information that is necessary to draw the conclusion. In this case, the argument states that the lower accident rate for drivers 65 and older is caused because they are safer drivers. What else might cause a lower accident rate?

Step 4: Work from Wrong to Right

(A) CORRECT. If the cause of the lower accident rate among drivers 65 and over is their safe driving due to experience and caution, it is important to rule out alternative explanations for the lower accident rate. Mileage driven is one such alternate explanation; between two equally safe drivers, the one who drives fewer miles is less likely to get in an accident. This answer rules out the possibility that the lower accident rate for older drives is just due to driving fewer miles.

(B) The argument presents data about the percentage of drivers by age group who are involved in accidents. Thus, the number of drivers in each age group does not matter to these comparisons or the related conclusions.

(C) This information provides an alternate explanation for the lower accident rate, weakening the conclusion. Drivers 65 and over may have a lower accident rate because they drive in better conditions, not because they're safer drivers.

(D) This information supports some of the logic in the conclusion – that experience results in safer driving. But it is not necessary that the cause of the reduction in accident frequency for drivers 21 to 24 be the same as the cause of the reduction in accident frequency for those 65 and older. For example, suppose that 21 to 24 year olds have fewer accidents than those under 21 because they tend to drive cars with better brakes and other technology that may prevent accidents. Even in this case, those 65 and older could still be safer drivers due to their caution and experience.

(E) The conclusion is comparing drivers 65 and older to younger drivers, specifically those under 24. This conclusion and argument could still be valid even if there were some other age group (for example those 40 to 45) that has an even lower accident frequency.


A beautiful GMAT question for which I promise you is EASY, but you have to really, really understand what the stimulus says and what the answer choices say. You must be careful when answering, let's attack it.

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

(A) Drivers 65 and older do not, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.

If drivers 65 and older don't drive fewer miles as a percentage of the overall group, than do drivers 24 and younger, then we can assume that drivers 65 and older are on the road just as frequently or as long as drivers 24 and under are. This actually follows the logic of the argument. Lets keep this one and come back to revisit it.

(B) Drivers 65 and older do not constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do.

The author actually wrote that the these statistics were written as a percentage of their respective groups. Thus, the author already confirmed the fact that the argument is disregarding the actual number of drivers of each category on the road as a result of comparing the two percentages and not the absolute values.

(C) Drivers 65 and older are less likely than are drivers 24 and younger to drive during weather conditions that greatly increase the risk of accidents.

While this may be true, we don't have enough information from the stimulus to determine what effect this has on the actual percentages. While attractive, one has to realize that there is no real merit to this assumption as a result of the author's argument because of the lack of information in the stimulus. What can we really conclusively determine from this?

(D) The difference between the accident rate of drivers under 21 and of those ages 21-24 is attributable to the greater driving experience of those in the older group.

While this may be true and does in fact follow the argument, this is not a required assumption to arrive at the author's argument that those who are 65 or older have more experience and thus have less accidents. We're interested in a comparison between those 65 and older and those 24 and under.

(E) There is no age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older.

While this answer choice, also, may be true and thusly would follow the author's argument, it is not a requirement for the argument. There could be an age group, for example, drivers age 50-65 who if they had an even lower percentage than those 65 or older, there could be alternative factors (sight, reflexes) that could also explain why those age 65 or older could have a higher accident rate than those 50-65, while still maintaining a higher level of experience. This is not a required assumption.
Intern
Intern
User avatar
B
Joined: 20 Aug 2017
Posts: 37
Reviews Badge
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Sep 2019, 04:06
Dear ChiranjeevSingh GMATNinja

I understand that why option A is correct and perfect.
But I wanted to clarify certain aspect about Option E.

Is the author of the question in the Conclusion alluding to the younger drivers( colored Red) to be the Same or younger drivers in general than the 65-and-older group?

In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 percent of drivers ages 21-24 were in serious accidents. By contrast, only 3 percent of licensed drivers 65 and older were involved in serious accidents. These figures clearly show that the greater experience and developed habits of caution possessed by drivers in the 65-and-older group make them far safer behind the wheel than the younger drivers are.

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

(E) There is no age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older.

Case 1:If the author of the question is alluding to the colored younger drivers then the E option is incorrect.

Case 2: If the author of the question is alluding to younger drivers in general than the 65-and-older group
Say a Case that a group between 35-40 has accident rate of 1 percent.

Then Doesn't the below conclusion breaks?
These figures clearly show that the greater experience and developed habits of caution possessed by drivers in the 65-and-older group make them far safer behind the wheel than the younger drivers are.

Case 2 breaks the above blue colored part thereby breaking the complete conclusion?

Could you please enlighten?
GMAT Tutor
User avatar
P
Status: Private GMAT Tutor
Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Posts: 154
Location: India
Concentration: Economics, Finance
Schools: IIMA (A)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V47
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Sep 2019, 22:40
Deadpool3 wrote:
Dear ChiranjeevSingh GMATNinja

I understand that why option A is correct and perfect.
But I wanted to clarify certain aspect about Option E.

Is the author of the question in the Conclusion alluding to the younger drivers( colored Red) to be the Same or younger drivers in general than the 65-and-older group?

In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 percent of drivers ages 21-24 were in serious accidents. By contrast, only 3 percent of licensed drivers 65 and older were involved in serious accidents. These figures clearly show that the greater experience and developed habits of caution possessed by drivers in the 65-and-older group make them far safer behind the wheel than the younger drivers are.

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

(E) There is no age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older.

Case 1:If the author of the question is alluding to the colored younger drivers then the E option is incorrect.

Case 2: If the author of the question is alluding to younger drivers in general than the 65-and-older group
Say a Case that a group between 35-40 has accident rate of 1 percent.

Then Doesn't the below conclusion breaks?
These figures clearly show that the greater experience and developed habits of caution possessed by drivers in the 65-and-older group make them far safer behind the wheel than the younger drivers are.

Case 2 breaks the above blue colored part thereby breaking the complete conclusion?

Could you please enlighten?


Even if we take it to be "younger drivers in general" i.e. drivers less than 65 years of age, option E still doesn't break down the argument since the age bracket for which the accident rate is lower could be of people, let's say, aged 80 and over. So, there exist situations in which the argument holds even in the face of negation of the option.

- CJ
_________________
Intern
Intern
User avatar
B
Joined: 20 Aug 2017
Posts: 37
Reviews Badge
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Sep 2019, 03:03
Dear ChiranjeevSingh

Thank you for your reply!

I still have a doubt about your example:
Sir in below option E it is mentioned as
There is no age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older..

Doesn't the group 65 and older. covers all those older than 65. and If a certain group younger than them has least accident rate then doesn't that breaks the conclusion when case is of "younger drivers in general" i.e. drivers less than 65 years of age,

Conclusion:
These figures clearly show that the greater experience and developed habits of caution possessed by drivers in the 65-and-older group make them far safer behind the wheel than the younger drivers are.
GMAT Tutor
User avatar
P
Status: Private GMAT Tutor
Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Posts: 154
Location: India
Concentration: Economics, Finance
Schools: IIMA (A)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V47
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Sep 2019, 07:01
Deadpool3 wrote:
Dear ChiranjeevSingh

Thank you for your reply!

I still have a doubt about your example:
Sir in below option E it is mentioned as
There is no age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older..

Doesn't the group 65 and older. covers all those older than 65. and If a certain group younger than them has least accident rate then doesn't that breaks the conclusion when case is of "younger drivers in general" i.e. drivers less than 65 years of age,

Conclusion:
These figures clearly show that the greater experience and developed habits of caution possessed by drivers in the 65-and-older group make them far safer behind the wheel than the younger drivers are.


Good question! I was actually thinking of writing about this aspect while posting. However, I decided that I'd write about this if you asked a doubt. And here I am :)

You are right: 65 years and older includes 80 years and older. However, just because I have created an age bracket 65 and older doesn't mean that I cannot create an age bracket 80 years and older. Rather, it's pretty common to talk in terms of overlapping sets in many contexts. For example: the average property prices in the US are lower than the average property prices in New York. The comparison makes sense even though New York is a part of the US. Similarly, the accident rate for the age group 65 years and older may be higher than that for the age group 80 years and older.
_________________
Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 21 Nov 2018
Posts: 165
Location: India
GMAT 1: 680 Q48 V35
GMAT 2: 640 Q48 V29
GMAT 3: 720 Q47 V42
GPA: 3.5
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Feb 2020, 09:04
In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 percent of drivers ages 21-24 were in serious accidents. By contrast, only 3 percent of licensed drivers 65 and older were involved in serious accidents. These figures clearly show that the greater experience and developed habits of caution possessed by drivers in the 65-and-older group make them far safer behind the wheel than the younger drivers are.

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

(A) Drivers 65 and older do not, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.

(B) Drivers 65 and older do not constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do.

(C) Drivers 65 and older are less likely than are drivers 24 and younger to drive during weather conditions that greatly increase the risk of accidents.

(D) The difference between the accident rate of drivers under 21 and of those ages 21-24 is attributable to the greater driving experience of those in the older group.

(E) There is no age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older.

The author states that there are only two reasons why only 3% of licensed drivers involved in serious accidents are of age group 65yrs and older - greater experience and developed habits of caution.

A. This is the assumption because it eliminates the possibility of a third reason that people aged 65+ actually drive less and hence are less likely to be involved in an accident.

B. If you negate this statement it actually strengthens the conclusion instead of breaking it down and hence cannot be the assumption. If there are 100 licensed drivers 3 people would be aged 65+ and 27 (16+11) would fall in the younger group(18-24). Now if out of these 100 licensed drives 55 are 65+ and 45 are younger (18-24) then that would still indicate that only 3 out of 55 people aged 65+ are involved in a serious accident where as 27 out of 45 people aged 18-24 are involved in a serious accident.

C. Not driving in bad weather conditions actually shows developed habit of caution practised by people of age 65+ and hence need not be an assumption. Again if you negate this statement and say that people of both age groups are equally likely to drive in bad weather conditions then it strengthens the conclusion in a way. This cannot be our assumption.

D. We only need to compare age groups 18-24 and 65 and above.

E. Same reason as D.


_________________
Beautiful is the one who continues to try despite failure.
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 29 May 2017
Posts: 191
Location: Pakistan
Concentration: Social Entrepreneurship, Sustainability
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Feb 2020, 00:51
GMATNinja

the dreaded option E.....:)

option A ensures that the percentages given are comparisons of similar driving times.

my question is: in absence of A, wd E be the correct choice?

one way to look at is the TREND: the percentage of accidents seem to be a declining trend so one cd argue that between 24-65 the percentages wd continue to fall

which brings me to the question.....is it correct to assume there IS a trend?
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Status: Climbing the GMAT mountain
Joined: 11 Feb 2018
Posts: 65
Location: Germany
Concentration: Technology, Strategy
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Feb 2020, 12:02
1
hazelnut wrote:
In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 percent of drivers ages 21-24 were in serious accidents. By contrast, only 3 percent of licensed drivers 65 and older were involved in serious accidents. These figures clearly show that the greater experience and developed habits of caution possessed by drivers in the 65-and-older group make them far safer behind the wheel than the younger drivers are.

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


Pre-Thinking what author is saying:
1.) presents some figures.
2.) Conclusion: greater experience and developed habits are the reason, why the 65+ year olds have such a low accident rate.

What did the author assume to draw that conclusion?
That 65+ year olds have " greater experience and developed habits" in the first place. Only then would that conclusion make sense.


(A) Drivers 65 and older do not, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.
Expl: Wordy, but hits the point. The author assumes that 65+ year olds have greater experience, therefore the assumption that 65+ year olds drive at least as much as 24-and-younger-ones do, is pretty much what we want.
There still could be a better answer choice which says that 65+ year olds definitely have better experience or smth.....so keep looking. But hold A) for now.
Good choice so far!

(B) Drivers 65 and older do not constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do.
Expl: Quick look back at the figures tells us, that the figures are already in percent. So if 65+ year olds would make up a larger percentage, still only 3 percent would be involved in accidents.
Assumptions on percentages would have absolutely no effect because of that. Also, the author is saying nothing that would be attributable to a lesser/larger percentage of licensed drivers of a group.
Incorrect.

(C) Drivers 65 and older are less likely than are drivers 24 and younger to drive during weather conditions that greatly increase the risk of accidents.
Expl: One may could be tempted by this answer. Because we are looking for an assumption that states that 65+ year olds have more experience.
But this answer choice here goes one step further and says that 65+ year olds definitely drive less on bad weather conditions. We cannot necessarily say that. we have to be strict.
Incorrect.

(D) The difference between the accident rate of drivers under 21 and of those ages 21-24 is attributable to the greater driving experience of those in the older group.
Expl: Another more tempting answer choice. in a general term it says, the author assumes that difference in accident rate between age groups is attributable to greater driving experience.
Which sounds to be in the line of reasoning of the author. But look closely, thats all there is to it.
First, why is it so specific about the younger two groups? Could be better if it talks about two groups involving those 65+ year olds, since we are talking about them.
Secondly, and more importantly, this just restates the conclusion. Not what the author assumes. It just restates the conclusion that difference in accident rates is because of the better driving experience. GMAT never asks in Assumption-Questions for answer choices that just restate what the author is saying. Thats not an unstated assumption. those restatements can not be correct in assumption questions!!!
Incorrect.

(E) There is no age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older.
Expl: Does the author assume that in order to draw his conclusion? Does the author assume that the accident rate is lowest for 65+ year olds in order to draw the conclusion that they have such low accident rates because of their better experience? Think about it..... No!
Incorrect.

Only A) is left, make your move then.
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 16 Jan 2020
Posts: 67
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Feb 2020, 01:30
In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 percent of drivers ages 21-24 were in serious accidents. By contrast, only 3 percent of licensed drivers 65 and older were involved in serious accidents. These figures clearly show that the greater experience and developed habits of caution possessed by drivers in the 65-and-older group make them far safer behind the wheel than the younger drivers are.

>21 - 16% 21-24 = 11% - have met serious accidents.
>65 - 3% - serious accidents.
Conclusion: Greater experience and developed habits of caution possessed by driver >65, make them safer driver


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

(A) Drivers 65 and older do not, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.
Right. Everything has to be constant for them in terms of driving miles for them to come on this conclusion. If the >65 do not drive much, then there
chances of having serious accidents will decrease but then this percentage comparison will be nullified in the premise. It won't hold true as it won't be fair.

(B) Drivers 65 and older do not constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do.
Wrong. The premise is already stating that the percentage of drivers above 65 drive safe because they are more cautioned, and not because their population is less. This will weaken the argument and not give an assumption. To assume the above figures about serious accidents, we would have to keep all the other
factors same. So the population also has to be equal or near by same for us to conclude it.

(C) Drivers 65 and older are less likely than are drivers 24 and younger to drive during weather conditions that greatly increase the risk of accidents.
Wrong. In the premise it has not been mentioned about the weather conditions causing the risk of accidents. It is stated in the passage that it is the developed habits and greater experience which prevents the older generation to have accidents.

(D) The difference between the accident rate of drivers under 21 and of those ages 21-24 is attributable to the greater driving experience of those in the older group.
Wrong. The difference is 4% but how is it "attributable" to the greater driving experience? How is it caused by greater driving experience? This sentence does not make sense.

(E) There is no age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older.

Wrong. They are talking about a new age category which has a lower rate of accidents than driver of 65 and older. But it is not even relevant for the premise.
Intern
Intern
User avatar
B
Status: Aim for the moon. If you miss, you may hit a star.
Joined: 21 Jan 2020
Posts: 32
Location: United States (IL)
Schools: Kellogg PT '23, Booth
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V37
GPA: 3.68
WE: Supply Chain Management (Health Care)
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Feb 2020, 18:44
Here’s how I break down the analysis:

Step 1: identify the logic chain of stimuli in simple words. Old people drive much more safely than young people, it must be their exp. and habits that contribute to the difference.
— we can pretty easily identify there is a logic gap here: no evidence indicates the success factors are “experience” and “developed habits”, or defines whether lower % is due to less old people driving

Step 2: identify the question stem: it asks for an assumption.
— since we already identified a logic gap, Prephrase the correct answer: the assumption can rule out other success factors, or rule out weakness such as “less old people can physically drive”
— remind yourself to use “negation” to validate contender choices

With above thoughts in mind, let’s look at all answer choices:
A) Correct. It matches perfectly with one of the correct answer prephrase - rule out the weakness
B) proportion between young and old people is not the key here - it doesn’t matter whether old people is insanely less than young people, their performance is still much better. Also negate it doesn’t weaken argument
C) This is a good “strengthen” case but not “assumption”, meaning argument can be valid with specific strengthen case, but can’t be valid with assumption. Also not as strong as A
D) This might be a good “strengthen” case, but not “assumption”, same reason as C. It can be the fact that the accident rate of 21 to 24 is higher than <21 group, but as along as “>=65” age group has much lower accident rate the conclusion still can hold true
E) This does not have to be true: as long as a considerable difference can be observed that exceeds measurement error (exceptions and outliers), the conclusion can still hold true, so not an assumption

Posted from my mobile device
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
D
Status: GMAT and GRE tutors
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 3252
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Feb 2020, 07:34
1
Mansoor50 wrote:
GMATNinja

the dreaded option E.....:)

option A ensures that the percentages given are comparisons of similar driving times.

my question is: in absence of A, wd E be the correct choice?

one way to look at is the TREND: the percentage of accidents seem to be a declining trend so one cd argue that between 24-65 the percentages wd continue to fall

which brings me to the question.....is it correct to assume there IS a trend?

Remember, the conclusion of this argument is, "These figures clearly show that the greater experience and developed habits of caution possessed by drivers in the 65-and-older group make them far safer behind the wheel than younger drivers are."

This post explains why it's so important to take this conclusion exactly as it's written.

Additionally, the question asks which choice is an assumption on which the argument depends. So in our process of elimination, we need to determine whether each answer choice is an assumption that MUST be true for this specific conclusion to be valid.

In the same post I linked to above, I've explained here why choice (E) is NOT a required assumption (the accident rate of licensed drivers 65 and older has no impact on the argument the author is making).

If (A) were not one of the choices, we would still eliminate (E), because on its own merits, this choice is not required for the conclusion to be valid.

I hope this helps!
_________________
GMAT/GRE tutors @ www.gmatninja.com (we're hiring!) | GMAT Club Verbal Expert | Instagram | Blog | Bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal: RC | CR | SC

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars: all videos by topic

SC articles & resources: How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

RC, CR, and other articles & resources: All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99 | Time management on verbal

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations: All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply? Hit the request verbal experts' reply button; be specific about your question, and tag @GMATNinja. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11   [#permalink] 28 Feb 2020, 07:34

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   [ 51 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





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