Many political economists beleive that the soundest

Question

Many political economists beleive that the soundest indicator of the economic health of a nation is the nation's gross national product (GNP) per capita - a figure reached by dividing the total value of the goods produced   yearly in a nation by its popolation and taken to be a measure of the welfare of the nation's residents. But there are many factors affecting residents' welfare that are not captured by per capita GNP; human indicators, while sometimes more difficult to calculate or document, provide sounder measures of a nation's progress than does the indicator championed by these economists. These human indicators include nutrition and life expectancy; birth weight and level of infant mortality; ratio of population level to availability of resources; employment opportunities; and the ability of governments to provide services such as education, clean water, medicine, public transporation, and mass communication for their residents. 

The economists defend their use of per capita GNP as the sole measure of a nation's economic health by claiming that improvments in per capita GNP eventually stimulate improvements in human indicators. But, in actuality, this often fails to occur. Even in nations where economic stimulation has brought about substaintial improvments in per capita GNP, economic health as measured by human indicators does not always reach a level commensurate with the per capita GNP. Nations that have acheived a relatively high per capita GNP, for example, sometimes experience levels of infant survival, literacy, nutrition, and life expectancy no greater than levels in nations where per capita GNP is relatively low. In addition, because per capita GNP is an averaged figure, it often presents a distorted picture of the wealth of a nation; for example, in a relatively sparsely populated nation where a small percentage of residents receives most of the economic benefits of production while the majority receives very little benefit, per capita GNP may nevertheless be high. The welfare of a nation's residents is a matter not merely of total economic benefit, but also of the distribution of economic benefits across the entire society. Measuring a nation's economic health only by total wealth frequently obscures a lack of distribution of wealth across the society as a whole. 

In light of the potential for such imbalances in distribution of economic benefits, some nations have begun to realize that their domestic economic efforts are better directed away from attempting to raise per capita GNP and instead toward ensuring that the conditions measured by human indicators are salutary. They recognize that unless a shift in focus away from using material wealth as the sole indicator of economic success is effected, the well-being of a nations may be endangered, and that nations that do well according to human indicators may thrive even if their per capita GNP remains stable or lags behind that of other nations. 

 The passage provides specific information about each of the following EXCEPT 

A) how per capita GNP is calculated
B) what many political economists believe to be an accurate measure of a nation's economic health
C) how nations with a relatively low per capita GNP can sometimes be economically healthier than nations whose per capita GNP is higher.
D) why human indicators may not provide the same picture of a nation's economic health that per capita GNP does
E) how nations can adjust their domestic economic efforts to bring about substaintial improvments in per capita GNP


 The primary function of the last paragraph of the passage is to  

A) offer a synthesis of the opposing positions
B) expose the inadequacies of both positions outlined in the first two paragraphs
C) summarize the argument made in the first two paragraphs
D) correct a weakness in the political economists' position as outlined in the second paragraph
E) suggest policy implications of the arguement made in the first two paragraphs.

HIMALAYA · Answer

E and C.

Darth_McDaddy · Answer

1E and 2E

1E because the passage does not mention how nations can adjust their domestic economic policies to improve their GDP

2E, because the last para clearly states that when goverments shift away from improving their GDP, to improving the conditions measured by the GDP will help improve the well being of the society.

gmataquaguy · Answer

Any more takers before i post the OA? I'll do so later today and would like to start a discussion about these 2 questions.

akrishnananda · Answer

I would go with E and C.

rthothad · Answer

I will go with E & C.

flyto · Answer

I will pick E and D.

There is no disagreement for E for 1.

D The author said a lot in the previous paragraphs about the deficiency of using GDP as the sole indicator, the last paragraphs said some coutries have realized that and began to change in their action. So I think the last paragraph does not function as summary but as suggested correct action. As a summary, the paragraph should continue on the deficiencies

flyto · Answer

After reconsideration, I will pick E for 2

The last paragraph suggests a new policy"a shift in focus away from using material wealth as the sole indicator of economic success is effected"

HIMALAYA · Answer

seem E and E.

HIMALAYA · Answer

do you have OA?

gmataquaguy · Answer

The OA is E, E. 

I have some follow up questions about the OA. I dont have the OE.

 Question #1: 

While i realize the "how" portion of AC E for question #1 isnt explicitly answered neither is AC D. I've scanned the passage a couple of times and nowhere does it allude to the following:  why human indicators may not provide the same picture of a nation's economic health that per capita GNP does.  

I could see why the AC would be eliminated if the AC was phrased as  why GNP does not provide the same picture of a nation's economic health that human indicators do  ---> This is something the author of the passage would lobby for. 

So why did you guys eliminate AC D?

 Question #2: 

The author in the first 2 paragraphs expounds why GNP shouldnt be used, providing the reasons why it is a bad choice for the "real" economic health of a nation. 

In the 3rd paragraph, he says "because of the aforementioned flaws" some nations are recognizing the need to move away from just using GNP and using "human factors". 

With that being said, how does that   translate   to "suggest policy implications of the argument made in the first two paragraphs". 

Can anyone shed some more light on my questions? I picked D, D for both.

gmataquaguy · Answer

Could someone answer my questions please?

rthothad · Answer

Regarding Q1:
Why human indicators may not provide the same picture of a nation's economic health that per capita GNP does.

This can be answered from the following sentence in the passage. 
"But there are many factors affecting residents' welfare that are not captured by per capita GNP; human indicators, while sometimes more difficult to calculate or document, provide sounder measures of a nation's progress than does the indicator championed by these economists."

Human indicators provide sounder measures of a nation's progress compared to the traditional method, they provide a different picture - Both of them use different yard sticks to measure a nation's progress hence different results.

Darth_McDaddy · Answer

Hello gmataquaguy,

Apologize for responding late to your PM. 

Regarding the Question 1, as rthothad mentions, the answer is found in the lines he has paraphrased

Regarding Question 2, The last sentence explains the answer choice the best.

"They recognize that unless a shift in focus away from using material wealth as the sole indicator of economic success is effected, the well-being of a nations may be endangered, and that nations that do well according to human indicators may thrive even if their per capita GNP remains stable or lags behind that of other nations."

That is, if nations follow the GNP model, the well being of a nation is endangered, and instead if they follow the human indicators model, the nations will do well even if their GNP lags behind other nations. The author is alluding to the policy implications of the two models in the first two paras. Therefore E.

Choice D is a finely laid trap. While it is true that the author points to the weaknesses in the GNP model, the author DOES NOT CORRECT this model, but instead suggests a whole new model - the human indicator model.

ssap · Answer

A bit late - agree with E & E

Many political economists beleive that the soundest

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