It is currently 21 Nov 2017, 21:27

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Of the people who moved from one state to another when they

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

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 08 Dec 2010
Posts: 199

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 26

WE 1: 4 yr IT
Re: Of the people who moved from one state [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jan 2011, 04:09
E. that was straight forward.
no offence meant, but is this really 700 level Q?
either that or this must be my lucky day coz i too am weak in CR
_________________

this time, we play for keeps

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 26

Manager
Joined: 27 Oct 2010
Posts: 179

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 20

Re: Of the people who moved from one state [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jan 2011, 09:10
E. Easy one.

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 20

Senior Manager
Joined: 30 Nov 2010
Posts: 257

Kudos [?]: 120 [1], given: 66

Schools: UC Berkley, UCLA
Re: Of the people who moved from one state [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jan 2011, 12:12
1
This post received
KUDOS
ajit257 wrote:
Of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired, the proportion who retired to SunState has decreased by 10 percent over the past five years. Since many local businesses in SunState cater to retirees, this decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

a. SunState attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state.
b. There are far more local businesses in SunState that cater to tourists than there are local businesses that cater to retirees.
c. The number of retirees who have moved out of SunState to accept re-employment in other states has increased over the past five years.
d. SunState has lower property taxes than any other state, making the state a magnet for retirees.
e. The total number of people who retired and moved to another state for their retirement has increased significantly over the past five years.

Can someone tell me how to improve on my CR. Apparently i am doing ok in OG but I am being battered in mgmat exams. Please could someone help me out here. Thanks

Hello ajit,

It would be good if you had a good grasp of CR as a whole and I also believe that the Powerscore CR would definitely help you in that area.
After that just practicing would help improve your score. Try to find some LSAT exams with which to practice, it has difficult questions compared to those the GMAT has. So, yup I think that would help you.

Let's come to the q: The passage says "Of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired, the proportion who retired to SunState has decreased by 10 percent over the past five years."
Then it concludes the argument by saying, "Since many local businesses in SunState cater to retirees, this decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses."

The author assumes that the local businesses will suffer because there aren't that many retirees coming into Sunstate. What would weaken (or cause someone to doubt the conclusion) the argument is that the local businesses would not suffer a negative economic effect.

How do we show this? By showing that there is not that much of a significant change in the amount of retirees coming into the state.
The passage says that the number of retirees coming into the state has decreased by 10% it could mean that the original number is 100,000 (bringing the current number to 99,000) that's a significant change. Now what if the original number of retirees decreased from 100 retirees (now the number of retirees would become 90 - a decline of 10%).

E is correct because it says that the total number of retirees that moved to another state increased instead of decreased - so that would mean taht the percentage does not exactly represent a significant decrease, therefore the local businesses would not suffer a negative economic effect.

IMHO

HTH

Mari
_________________

Thank you for your kudoses Everyone!!!

"It always seems impossible until its done."
-Nelson Mandela

Kudos [?]: 120 [1], given: 66

Manager
Joined: 27 Jul 2010
Posts: 190

Kudos [?]: 46 [0], given: 15

Location: Prague
Schools: University of Economics Prague
Re: Of the people who moved from one state [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jan 2011, 08:56
Eeasy one and I agree CR Bible is very good book.
_________________

You want somethin', go get it. Period!

Kudos [?]: 46 [0], given: 15

Board of Directors
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3381

Kudos [?]: 9296 [0], given: 1169

Re: Of the people who moved from one state [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Sep 2011, 03:44
mariyea wrote:
ajit257 wrote:
Of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired, the proportion who retired to SunState has decreased by 10 percent over the past five years. Since many local businesses in SunState cater to retirees, this decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

a. SunState attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state.
b. There are far more local businesses in SunState that cater to tourists than there are local businesses that cater to retirees.
c. The number of retirees who have moved out of SunState to accept re-employment in other states has increased over the past five years.
d. SunState has lower property taxes than any other state, making the state a magnet for retirees.
e. The total number of people who retired and moved to another state for their retirement has increased significantly over the past five years.

Can someone tell me how to improve on my CR. Apparently i am doing ok in OG but I am being battered in mgmat exams. Please could someone help me out here. Thanks

Hello ajit,

It would be good if you had a good grasp of CR as a whole and I also believe that the Powerscore CR would definitely help you in that area.
After that just practicing would help improve your score. Try to find some LSAT exams with which to practice, it has difficult questions compared to those the GMAT has. So, yup I think that would help you.

Let's come to the q: The passage says "Of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired, the proportion who retired to SunState has decreased by 10 percent over the past five years."
Then it concludes the argument by saying, "Since many local businesses in SunState cater to retirees, this decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses."

The author assumes that the local businesses will suffer because there aren't that many retirees coming into Sunstate. What would weaken (or cause someone to doubt the conclusion) the argument is that the local businesses would not suffer a negative economic effect.

How do we show this? By showing that there is not that much of a significant change in the amount of retirees coming into the state.
The passage says that the number of retirees coming into the state has decreased by 10% it could mean that the original number is 100,000 (bringing the current number to 99,000) that's a significant change. Now what if the original number of retirees decreased from 100 retirees (now the number of retirees would become 90 - a decline of 10%).

E is correct because it says that the total number of retirees that moved to another state increased instead of decreased - so that would mean taht the percentage does not exactly represent a significant decrease, therefore the local businesses would not suffer a negative economic effect.

IMHO

HTH

Mari

what do you say is this: the decrease of 10% is not to much compared to the TOTAL number of people that move from one state to another ??? for me C could best fit the bill.........but OA makes sense.
_________________

Kudos [?]: 9296 [0], given: 1169

Manager
Joined: 09 Jun 2011
Posts: 105

Kudos [?]: 65 [0], given: 0

Re: Of the people who moved from one state [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Sep 2011, 07:07
Which Edition of Manhattan Critical Reasoning Strategy Guide? Can you please cite the clear source?

Kudos [?]: 65 [0], given: 0

Manager
Status: exam is close ... dont know if i ll hit that number
Joined: 06 Jun 2011
Posts: 187

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 1

Location: India
Concentration: International Business, Marketing
GMAT Date: 10-09-2012
GPA: 3.2
Re: Of the people who moved from one state to another when they [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Aug 2012, 08:51
missed it though its an easy one
i always do cr better as time prolongs

does it happen to anybody else????
_________________

just one more month for exam...

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 1

Intern
Joined: 27 Sep 2012
Posts: 5

Kudos [?]: 34 [1], given: 17

Of the people who moved from one state to another when they [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Sep 2012, 13:31
1
This post received
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired, the proportion who retired to SunState has
decreased by 10 percent over the past five years. Since many local businesses in SunState cater to retirees, this
decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses. Which of the following, if true,
most seriously weakens the argument?

A) SunState attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state.
B) There are far more local businesses in SunState that cater to tourists than there are local businesses that cater to
retirees.
C) The number of retirees who have moved out of SunState to accept re-employment in other states has increased
over the past five years.
D) SunState has lower property taxes than any other state, making the state a magnet for retirees.
E) The total number of people who retired and moved to another state for their retirement has increased significantly
over the past five years.

Kudos [?]: 34 [1], given: 17

Intern
Joined: 23 Sep 2012
Posts: 16

Kudos [?]: 92 [3], given: 10

GMAT Date: 10-12-2012
Re: Retirement paradox [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Sep 2012, 13:50
3
This post received
KUDOS
(A) The fact that SunState attracts more retirees than any other state does not address the impact of the declining proportion of retirees moving to SunState.
(B) The existence of other businesses in SunState that do not cater to retirees is not relevant.
(C) Any increase in departure of retirees from SunState to accept re-employment would further damage businesses that serve retirees. However, the argument explicitly discusses the impact of the declining percentage of retirees relocating to SunState, and no other factors, making this answer choice irrelevant. In any case, this answer choice suggests that such businesses will indeed lose business, which would strengthen the conclusion, not weaken it.
(D) Low property taxes provide one reason why SunState is an appealing destination for retirees, but this is not relevant in determining the economic
impact of the smaller proportion of retirees moving to SunState overall.
(E) CORRECT. If the total number of retirees that relocated to other states increased significantly, a 10 percent reduction in the proportion of retirees that
moved to SunState may not result in a reduction in the actual number of people who moved to SunState. This choice weakens the contention that businesses that cater to retirees in SunState will suffer from a drop-off resulting from the percentage decrease.

Kudos [?]: 92 [3], given: 10

Director
Affiliations: SAE
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 519

Kudos [?]: 339 [0], given: 269

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Retirement paradox [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2012, 03:40
I answered this question wrongly. In spite of that fact, I am posting my flawed solving process for others to see.
+1 B

Premise 1 - Of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired, the proportion who retired to SunState has decreased by 10 percent over the past five years
Premise 2 - Since many local businesses in SunState cater to retirees

Conclusion - this decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses

Any option which weakens the conclusion or weakens the premise on which the conclusion is based is our answer

A) SunState attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state. (This strengthens the argument, eliminate)
B) There are far more local businesses in SunState that cater to tourists than there are local businesses that cater to retirees. (This options weakens the premise on which our conclusion is based and is thus our answer )
C) The number of retirees who have moved out of SunState to accept re-employment in other states has increased over the past five years. (This strengthens the argument, eliminate)
D) SunState has lower property taxes than any other state, making the state a magnet for retirees. (Irrelevant)
E) The total number of people who retired and moved to another state for their retirement has increased significantly over the past five years. (Although this number has increased they have not moved to SunState, eliminate)

_________________

First Attempt 710 - http://gmatclub.com/forum/first-attempt-141273.html

Kudos [?]: 339 [0], given: 269

Intern
Joined: 06 Mar 2012
Posts: 34

Kudos [?]: 83 [1], given: 12

Location: India
Concentration: Operations, International Business
GPA: 3.4
Re: Retirement paradox [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2012, 06:05
1
This post received
KUDOS
+1 E

Of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired, the proportion who retired to SunState has
decreased by 10 percent over the past five years.

Assume Required retirees in Sunstate to cater various businesses = 125

1st scenario :- Assume that 500 retirees moved from one state to another , 25 % moved to Sunstate - 125 retirees
2nd scenario :- As per 'E' if the total number of retirees who moved from one state to another are exceptionally high , lets say - 2000 , only 15% of 2000
i.e 300 (much higher than the required total retirees to cater businesses) moved to Sunstate

Press + 1 Kudos if you like my explanation

Kudos [?]: 83 [1], given: 12

Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 08 May 2012
Posts: 51

Kudos [?]: 384 [3], given: 4

Location: United States
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V47
Re: Retirement paradox [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2012, 14:10
3
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
getgyan wrote:
I answered this question wrongly. In spite of that fact, I am posting my flawed solving process for others to see.
+1 B

Premise 1 - Of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired, the proportion who retired to SunState has decreased by 10 percent over the past five years
Premise 2 - Since many local businesses in SunState cater to retirees

Conclusion - this decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses

Any option which weakens the conclusion or weakens the premise on which the conclusion is based is our answer

A) SunState attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state. (This strengthens the argument, eliminate)
B) There are far more local businesses in SunState that cater to tourists than there are local businesses that cater to retirees. (This options weakens the premise on which our conclusion is based and is thus our answer )
C) The number of retirees who have moved out of SunState to accept re-employment in other states has increased over the past five years. (This strengthens the argument, eliminate)
D) SunState has lower property taxes than any other state, making the state a magnet for retirees. (Irrelevant)
E) The total number of people who retired and moved to another state for their retirement has increased significantly over the past five years. (Although this number has increased they have not moved to SunState, eliminate)

Thanks for posting this – I actually think looking at common mistakes made on CR is a more useful way to learn than just reading correct solutions.

Let me try to explain exactly why this logic for (B) isn't quite correct.

One general point: we're not allowed to question premises on CR. This is a common technique used in everyday arguments (claiming your opponent has his facts wrong), but the GMAT is more interested in the internal logic of arguments. The only piece open to attacks are the assumptions.

Second major point, answer (B) does NOT actually attack a premise. Pay attention to the exact wording of the conclusion, the "decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses" The real issue is that the conclusion is talking about "these" businesses, by which we mean the ones that cater to retirees. So, the existence of tourism-related businesses is completely irrelevant!

So what is that assumption in the argument? Notice that the premises are all about percentages, but the conclusion is about the actual number of retirees (the business will hurt because they have fewer customers). This is one of the GMAT's favorite kind of assumptions to test. Just because the percentage is down doesn't mean the actual number is down. Look for an answer choice that exploits this problem, and only (E) does the trick!

Cheers,
Mark
_________________

Mark Sullivan | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | Seattle, WA

Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Course Reviews | View Instructor Profile

Kudos [?]: 384 [3], given: 4

Director
Affiliations: SAE
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 519

Kudos [?]: 339 [0], given: 269

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Retirement paradox [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Oct 2012, 00:33
Hi Mark

Thanks for the explanation

MarkSullivan wrote:
One general point: we're not allowed to question premises on CR. This is a common technique used in everyday arguments (claiming your opponent has his facts wrong), but the GMAT is more interested in the internal logic of arguments. The only piece open to attacks are the assumptions.

Is that so? Power Score CR, "Chapter 6 Weaken Questions - Page No. 113", clearly states that one of the classic ways to attack an argument is to attack the premises on which the conclusion rests.

Any thoughts?

_________________

First Attempt 710 - http://gmatclub.com/forum/first-attempt-141273.html

Kudos [?]: 339 [0], given: 269

Manager
Joined: 14 Nov 2008
Posts: 66

Kudos [?]: 27 [2], given: 1

Re: Of the people who moved from one state to another when they [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Sep 2013, 11:25
2
This post received
KUDOS
This argument concludes that a decline in the percentage of retirees who
relocate to SunState will have a negative impact on businesses there that cater
to retirees. However, a decline in this percentage would only have a negative
impact on businesses if it indicated a decrease in the actual number of retirees. If
the actual number of retirees is steady or increasing, then a decrease in the
percentage wouldn't matter. As we are looking for a statement that weakens the
argument, we should look for an answer choice that somehow mitigates the
effect of this percentage decrease.
(A) The fact that SunState attracts more retirees than any other state does not
address the impact of the declining proportion of retirees moving to SunState.
(B) The existence of other businesses in SunState that do not cater to retirees is
not relevant.
(C) Any increase in departure of retirees from SunState to accept re-employment
would further damage businesses that serve retirees. However, the argument
explicitly discusses the impact of the declining percentage of retirees relocating
to SunState, and no other factors, making this answer choice irrelevant. In any
case, this answer choice suggests that such businesses will indeed lose
business, which would strengthen the conclusion, not weaken it.
(D) Low property taxes provide one reason why SunState is an appealing
destination for retirees, but this is not relevant in determining the economic
impact of the smaller proportion of retirees moving to SunState overall.
(E) CORRECT. If the total number of retirees that relocated to other states
increased significantly, a 10 percent reduction in the proportion of retirees that
moved to SunState may not result in a reduction in the actual number of people
who moved to SunState. This choice weakens the contention that businesses
that cater to retirees in SunState will suffer from a drop-off resulting from the
percentage decrease.

Kudos [?]: 27 [2], given: 1

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10127

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

Re: Of the people who moved from one state to another when they [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Dec 2014, 01:08
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 [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 22 Aug 2014
Posts: 190

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 49

Re: Of the people who moved from one state to another when they [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Apr 2015, 04:39
getgyan wrote:
Hi Mark

Thanks for the explanation

MarkSullivan wrote:
One general point: we're not allowed to question premises on CR. This is a common technique used in everyday arguments (claiming your opponent has his facts wrong), but the GMAT is more interested in the internal logic of arguments. The only piece open to attacks are the assumptions.

Is that so? Power Score CR, "Chapter 6 Weaken Questions - Page No. 113", clearly states that one of the classic ways to attack an argument is to attack the premises on which the conclusion rests.

Any thoughts?

I used the same reasoning...I got the answer as B.
can someone explain why not B?

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 49

Manager
Joined: 22 Jan 2014
Posts: 141

Kudos [?]: 77 [0], given: 145

WE: Project Management (Computer Hardware)
Re: Of the people who moved from one state to another when they [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Apr 2015, 14:09
joesamson wrote:
Of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired, the proportion who retired to SunState has
decreased by 10 percent over the past five years. Since many local businesses in SunState cater to retirees, this
decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses. Which of the following, if true,
most seriously weakens the argument?

A) SunState attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state.
B) There are far more local businesses in SunState that cater to tourists than there are local businesses that cater to
retirees.
C) The number of retirees who have moved out of SunState to accept re-employment in other states has increased
over the past five years.
D) SunState has lower property taxes than any other state, making the state a magnet for retirees.
E) The total number of people who retired and moved to another state for their retirement has increased significantly
over the past five years.

first there were 100 people, out of which 100 moved to sunstate
after 5 years only 90 moved out of 100 (proportion decreases from 1 to 0.9 ie 10%)

if total people have increased to 1000 (say) and 900 move to sunstate (making proportion 0.9) hence the people who actually moved has increased.

hence, E.
_________________

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Kudos [?]: 77 [0], given: 145

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7743

Kudos [?]: 17839 [0], given: 235

Location: Pune, India
Re: Of the people who moved from one state to another when they [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Apr 2015, 00:43
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
ssriva2 wrote:
getgyan wrote:
Hi Mark

Thanks for the explanation

MarkSullivan wrote:
One general point: we're not allowed to question premises on CR. This is a common technique used in everyday arguments (claiming your opponent has his facts wrong), but the GMAT is more interested in the internal logic of arguments. The only piece open to attacks are the assumptions.

Is that so? Power Score CR, "Chapter 6 Weaken Questions - Page No. 113", clearly states that one of the classic ways to attack an argument is to attack the premises on which the conclusion rests.

Any thoughts?

I used the same reasoning...I got the answer as B.
can someone explain why not B?

Note that (B) does not attack the premises. The premises are always taken to be TRUE. In fact, (B) provides information that is irrelevant to the argument.

Premises:
- Of the retirees who moved from one state to another, the proportion who retired to SunState has decreased by 10 percent over the past 5 years.
- Many local businesses in SunState cater to retirees.

Conclusion: The decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect onthese businesses.

Our conclusion says that many businesses cater to retirees and a decrease in the proportion of retirees coming to SunState will affect these businesses.

B) There are far more local businesses in SunState that cater to tourists than there are local businesses that cater to retirees.

We don't care about businesses that cater to tourists and neither do we care about the proportion of businesses that cater to tourists vs proportion of businesses that cater to retirees. Our only concern is the economy of the businesses that actually cater to the retirees. Hence, this option is out of scope.

E) The total number of people who retired and moved to another state for their retirement has increased significantly
over the past five years.
This option tells us that the proportion of retirees coming to SunState might have reduced but many more retirees have started moving to other states so this means that in absolute numbers, the number of retirees coming to SunState might still be the same or even more.
So previously, say of the 1000 new retirees every year, 100 used to move out and 10% of those used to move to SunState. So SunState used to get 10 retirees every year.
Now, of the 1000 new retirees every year, say 500 move out and 5% of those are moving to SunState. So SunState is getting 25 retirees.
Hence, this option certainly weakens our argument that the decrease in proportion will affect the businesses catering to retirees.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for \$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Kudos [?]: 17839 [0], given: 235

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10127

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

Re: Of the people who moved from one state to another when they [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Apr 2015, 16:48
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 [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 27 Jul 2014
Posts: 322

Kudos [?]: 72 [0], given: 15

Schools: ISB '15
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V30
GPA: 3.76
Re: Of the people who moved from one state to another when they [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Apr 2015, 12:08
mariyea wrote:
ajit257 wrote:
Of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired, the proportion who retired to SunState has decreased by 10 percent over the past five years. Since many local businesses in SunState cater to retirees, this decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

a. SunState attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state.
b. There are far more local businesses in SunState that cater to tourists than there are local businesses that cater to retirees.
c. The number of retirees who have moved out of SunState to accept re-employment in other states has increased over the past five years.
d. SunState has lower property taxes than any other state, making the state a magnet for retirees.
e. The total number of people who retired and moved to another state for their retirement has increased significantly over the past five years.

Can someone tell me how to improve on my CR. Apparently i am doing ok in OG but I am being battered in mgmat exams. Please could someone help me out here. Thanks

Hello ajit,

It would be good if you had a good grasp of CR as a whole and I also believe that the Powerscore CR would definitely help you in that area.
After that just practicing would help improve your score. Try to find some LSAT exams with which to practice, it has difficult questions compared to those the GMAT has. So, yup I think that would help you.

Let's come to the q: The passage says "Of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired, the proportion who retired to SunState has decreased by 10 percent over the past five years."
Then it concludes the argument by saying, "Since many local businesses in SunState cater to retirees, this decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses."

The author assumes that the local businesses will suffer because there aren't that many retirees coming into Sunstate. What would weaken (or cause someone to doubt the conclusion) the argument is that the local businesses would not suffer a negative economic effect.

How do we show this? By showing that there is not that much of a significant change in the amount of retirees coming into the state.
The passage says that the number of retirees coming into the state has decreased by 10% it could mean that the original number is 100,000 (bringing the current number to 99,000) that's a significant change. Now what if the original number of retirees decreased from 100 retirees (now the number of retirees would become 90 - a decline of 10%).

E is correct because it says that the total number of retirees that moved to another state increased instead of decreased - so that would mean taht the percentage does not exactly represent a significant decrease, therefore the local businesses would not suffer a negative economic effect.

IMHO

HTH

Mari

Hi Mari

As u explained above the main conclusion is this decrease in retirees is causing negative economic effect on the businesses.

SO I picked B which says that even if retirees are decreasing still businesses have tourists which bring them business,hence not causing any economic effects.

Kindly explain

Kudos [?]: 72 [0], given: 15

Re: Of the people who moved from one state to another when they   [#permalink] 23 Apr 2015, 12:08

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3    Next  [ 47 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Of the people who moved from one state to another when they

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

 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®.