Over the past twenty-five years the introduction of labor-saving techn

E

A B & C are out of Scope
D is not correct (as the stimuli doesn't mention Anticipation any where)

Left with E.

Even if you don't use elimination, only E seems to be in line with the stimuli, all others seem out of context.

IMO it is E.
A) Workers on average spend more money on leisure activities today than they did twenty-five years ago.
>> Money out of scope.
(B) Labor-saving technologies have created fewer jobs than they have eliminated.
>> Less jobs out of scope.
(C) The percentage of the population that is in the work force has grown over the past twenty-five years.
>> Number of people is out of scope.
(D) The average hourly output per worker has not risen as much as had been anticipated when modern labor-saving technologies were first introduced.
>> At first I thought this could be one. But the passage mentions "twenty-five years the introduction of labor-saving technologies has greatly reduced the average amount of time a worker needs to produce a given output" .. that means it still is working. So D can not be the answer.
(E) Twenty-five years ago the average weekly output per worker was less than it is today.
>> Yes it is. This will be stongly supported by the above argument.

The stimulus,however,talks about numbers and averages and instinctively you think in terms of number and percentages chapter in Powerscore, the answer choices seems pretty easy and ONLY E is left out as every other AC seems out of scope.
Thanks,
-V

+1 E

Remember that Must be true questions don't accept new information in the answer choices.
The correct answer must be an inference based on the estimulus.
_________________

only E makes sense.
A - out of scope
B - not discussed so no
C - not discussed so no
D - what was anticipated is out of scope.
E - last sentence says that the average hourly output per worker has grown.

E it is.

Answer is E

25 YEARS AGO :-Total hours available to a worker each week = 7 Days X 24 Hours = 168 Hours
Off course the worker will not work for all 24 hours a day. He would finish his job and relax. Those Relaxing hours are called Leisure hours.
Mathematically speaking :- Total hours in a week (Work hours in a week + Leisure hours in a week)
Lets assume 25 YEARS AGO worker works all 7 days for 10 hours a day (70 hours per week) and his rate was 10 toys an hour==> 10 toys per hour X 70 hours a week = 700 toys per week
Total weekly hours available= 168 hours
His weekly work hours = 70 hours
Weekly leisure time available to worker = (168-70)= 98 Hours
25 years ago Weekly output ===> 700 toys per week.

Now statements tells us that TODAY weekly output has grown by X amount But leisure time has grown by only X/2 amount.
Since the weekly production has definitely increased, lets assume it has increased 10 times. (it can be 2 times, 200 times, 1.8 times.. How many times it doesn't matter but the sure thing is that "hourly" output has increased and by extension the "weekly" output has also increased) so now the worker makes 10 times of 700 toys = 10 X 700==> 7000 toys
But his leisure time has increased only half the original leisure time= 98 hours + half of 98 hours= 98+49=147 hours (This statement is not totally useless by the way, as it will be used to calculate TODAYS working hours )

Today Worker works 168-147=21 hours .. WHATTTTT !! Today the worker works only 21 hours in a whole week and still produces 7000 toys a week
His weekly Production ===> 7000 TOYS per week

So , we can see that 25 years ago a worker produced 700 toys and today he produces 7000 toys. It means 25 years ago his weekly production was less compared to today.

What answer choice is reconfirming the math. It's E

(E) Twenty-five years ago the average weekly output per worker was less than it is today.
_________________

(E) Twenty-five years ago the average weekly output per worker was less than it is today.
how E is the answer?
it might be that workers are working for longer hours twenty five years ago, so may be output worker may be equal to or larger 25 years ago.

Over the past twenty-five years the introduction of labor-saving technologies has greatly reduced the average amount of time a worker needs to produce a given output, potentially both reducing the number of hours each worker works each week and increasing workers’ leisure time correspondingly. The average amount of leisure time per worker, however, has increased at only half the rate at which the average hourly output per worker has grown.

If the statements above are true, which one of the following is most strongly supported by them?


(A) Workers on average spend more money on leisure activities today than they did twenty-five years ago.

(B) Labor-saving technologies have created fewer jobs than they have eliminated.

(C) The percentage of the population that is in the work force has grown over the past twenty-five years.

(D) The average hourly output per worker has not risen as much as had been anticipated when modern labor-saving technologies were first introduced.

(E) Twenty-five years ago the average weekly output per worker was less than it is today.

POE leads to E only. Rest all are irrelevant.

Answer E.
_________________

It is the case I think of too, can anybody elaborate?
Also, let's say the counterexample as below, which shows 25yrs ago the weekly output per worker was MORE than it is today, so choice E is NOT always TRUE:

-------------------------25 Years Ago-----------Today -----------Rate of Growth

Leisure Time------------16 Hrs/Day-----------20 Hrs/Day------------25%

Work Time---------------8 Hrs/Day------------4 Hrs/Day

Productivity/------------10 Units/Hr-----------15 Units/Hr -----------50%
Hourly Output

Total Output-------------80 Units/Day---------60 Units/Day