Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 25 May 2017, 12:35

### 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

Intern
Joined: 27 Sep 2012
Posts: 4
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 32 [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
00:00

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

60% (02:10) correct 40% (01:43) wrong based on 246 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

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.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
If you have any questions
you can ask an expert
New!
Intern
Joined: 23 Sep 2012
Posts: 14
GMAT Date: 10-12-2012
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 72 [3] , given: 10

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.
Director
Affiliations: SAE
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 508
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 44

Kudos [?]: 289 [0], given: 269

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

Intern
Joined: 06 Mar 2012
Posts: 35
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, International Business
GPA: 3.4
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 57 [1] , given: 12

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
Manhattan GMAT Instructor
Joined: 08 May 2012
Posts: 51
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V47
Followers: 278

Kudos [?]: 344 [3] , given: 4

Re: Retirement paradox [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2012, 14:10
3
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
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

Director
Affiliations: SAE
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 508
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 44

Kudos [?]: 289 [0], given: 269

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

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10366
Followers: 999

Kudos [?]: 225 [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.
Manager
Joined: 22 Aug 2014
Posts: 193
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 10 [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?
Manager
Joined: 22 Jan 2014
Posts: 140
WE: Project Management (Computer Hardware)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 63 [0], given: 143

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.

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7374
Location: Pune, India
Followers: 2288

Kudos [?]: 15110 [0], given: 224

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

### Show Tags

09 Apr 2015, 00:43
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

Director
Joined: 24 Nov 2015
Posts: 562
Location: United States (LA)
Followers: 11

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 227

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

### Show Tags

25 Jun 2016, 03:14
Basically we just have to expose the statistical flaw that even though the percentage dropped the total number of retirees has infact increased which is clearly explained in option E
Correct Answer - E
Re: Of the people who moved from one state to another when they   [#permalink] 25 Jun 2016, 03:14
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 CR Revision: Of the people who moved from one state to another when 2 30 Jan 2016, 05:17
5 Of the people who moved from one city to another when they 5 24 Apr 2017, 01:27
7 Of the people who moved from one state to another when they 13 13 Apr 2017, 12:33
1 Of the people who moved from one state to another when they 10 25 Jun 2016, 03:13
1 Of the people who moved from one state to another when they 8 25 Jun 2016, 03:11
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 and phpBB SEO 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®.