targetgmatchotu wrote:
A reduction in the number of people filing new claims for state unemployment benefits is one of the first signs that a nationwide recession is coming to an end. Usually such a reduction indicates that companies are not dismissing as many people, a sure sign of economic recovery. The number of people collecting state unemployment benefits has dropped considerably over the last three months, so the recession is coming to an end.
Which of the following is assumed in the passage above?
A majority of the number of people who became eligible to file unemployment benefits from the state in the past three months chose to do so.
The drop in the number of people collecting unemployment benefits from the state cannot be traced to a reduction in the number of people being dismissed from minimum wage jobs.
A substantial number of people who had been collecting unemployment benefits have been rehired by their former employers during the last three months.
A substantial number of people have not in the last three months moved from one state where they have collected unemployment benefits to another state where they continue to receive jobless benefits.
The reduction in the number of people collecting unemployment benefits from the state is not because of an increase in the number of people whose benefits came to an end.
Source: Veritas prep
Someone please tell why (A) isn't correct?
Responding to a pm:
When stuck between two options, use assumption negation technique.
Premises:
- A reduction in the number of people filing new claims for state unemployment benefits is one of the first signs that recession is ending.
- Usually such a reduction indicates that companies are not dismissing as many people, a sure sign of economic recovery.
- The number of people collecting state unemployment benefits has dropped considerably over the last three months
Conclusion: The recession is coming to an end.
From the premises to the conclusion, we are linking 'number of people filing new claims' to 'number of people collecting benefits'. We are saying that if the numebr of people collecting benefits has reduced, it means number of people filing new complaints has reduced too. There are two types of people collecting benefits: People who have been receiving benefits for a while and People putting in new claims.
If no of people collecting benefits has reduced, the reduction could be in the number of people who have been receiving benefits for a while or in no of people putting in new claims or in both.
If we say that reduction in no of people collecting benefits has reduced means reduction in no of people putting in new claims, we are assuming that number of people who have been receiving benefits for a while has stayed the same.
Hence answer (E)
Why not (A)?
Let's negate (A): Only few people who became eligible to file unemployment benefits from the state in the past three months chose to do so.
Is it still possible that recession is coming to an end? Sure. Perhaps only few people became eligible (were fired) and out of those only few filed for benefits. It is still possible that recession is coming to an end.
If the conclusion can hold even after negating an option, the option cannot be an assumption.
Karishma , I would not have been able to pick up the right choice . Luckily I remembered this argument from one article in Economist magazine where the reasoning was given as E. However I think that sometimes GMAC goes into too obscure reasoning and logical linkages in their CR section.