NEW HERE? LEARN MORE
closeclose
Last visit was: 23 Apr 2024, 10:30 It is currently 23 Apr 2024, 10:30
Decision Tracker
My Rewards
New posts
New comers' posts

Close
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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel

Between 1990 and 2000, the number of Americans aged 45 to 64

SORT BY:
Date
Kudos
Tags:
Find Similar Topics 
Show Tags
Hide Tags
avatar
deoljasms
Intern
Intern
Joined: 28 Jan 2013
Posts: 1
Own Kudos [?]: 23 [23]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
GMAT ToolKit User
Between 1990 and 2000, the number of Americans aged 45 to 64 [#permalink] New post   28 Jan 2013, 13:31
2
Kudos
21
Bookmarks
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

35% (medium)

Question Stats:

72% (02:15) correct 28% (02:21) wrong based on 567 sessions
Hide Show timer Statistics
Between 1990 and 2000, the number of Americans aged 45 to 64 was projected to increase from 47 million to 61 million, while the number of Americans aged 18 to 24 was projected to decrease from 26 million to 25 million. According to this projection, which of the following is closest to the ratio of the percent increase in the 45-to-64 age group to the percent decrease in the 18-to-24 age group?

A) 5 to 1
B) 6 to 1
C) 8 to 1
D) 10 to 1
E) 14 to 1

This question is from GMAT Focus.
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
C
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
gmatsaga
Manager
Manager
Joined: 05 Jun 2012
Status:Rising GMAT Star
Posts: 106
Own Kudos [?]: 269 [6]
Given Kudos: 16
Location: Philippines
Concentration: General Management, Finance
GPA: 3.22
WE:Corporate Finance (Consulting)
Send PM
Re: Between 1990 and 2000, the number of Americans aged 45 to 64 [#permalink] New post   29 Jan 2013, 00:48
5
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
deoljasms wrote:
Between 1990 and 2000, the number of Americans aged 45 to 64 was projected to increase from 47 million to 61 million, while the number of Americans aged 18 to 24 was projected to decrease from 26 million to 25 million. According to this projection, which of the following is closest to the ratio of the percent increase in the 45-to-64 age group to the percent decrease in the 18-to-24 age group?

A) 5 to 1
B) 6 to 1
C) 8 to 1
D) 10 to 1
E) 14 to 1

This question is from GMAT Focus.


My answer is C.

Given:
1990 - 2000 (one year)
Age 45 to 64 = 47 to 61
Age 18 to 24 = 26 to 25

Find: % increase in 45 to 65 / % decrease in 18 to 24

General formula: % increase or % decrease = (new number - old number ) / old number

That being said, we have:

% increase in 45 to 65 = (65 - 45) / 45 = 14 / 47

% decrease in 18 to 25 = (25 - 26) / 26 = - 1 / 26 or 1 / 26 (we can remove the negative sign because we are talking about changes here)

Now we use the two values:

= (14 / 47) / (1 / 26)

= (14 / 47) * ( 26)

= 364 / 47

~ 7.7...

7.7 is closest to 8, which is answer choice (C)

There you have it. :) Kudos please? :)
General Discussion
avatar
Nwsmith11
Intern
Intern
Joined: 28 Apr 2013
Posts: 9
Own Kudos [?]: 21 [2]
Given Kudos: 3
GMAT Date: 08-03-2013
GPA: 3.3
WE:Supply Chain Management (Military & Defense)
Send PM
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Between 1990 and 2000, the number of Americans aged 45 to 64 [#permalink] New post   11 Jun 2013, 17:15
2
Kudos
While the answer was still right in the above post the numbers are reversed...but here's my approach, quick and simple:


Americans 45-64: Increase 47M to 61M
Americans 18-24: Decrease 26M to 25M

Percent change = \(\frac{New-Old}{Old}\)

So we have \(\frac{61-47}{47}\) and \(\frac{25-26}{25}\)

Our ratio becomes \(\frac{14}{47}\):\(\frac{1}{25}\) which leads us to a factor of 14 in the numerator and almost a factor of 2 in the denominator: Since the answer choices were 5, 6, 8, 10, and 14 we know that it must be either 6 or 8 (around 7) and since the denominator isn't quite a factor of 2 different then we would be closer to 8>>Answer C
User avatar
mattce
Manager
Manager
Joined: 03 Jun 2013
Status:Training
Posts: 69
Own Kudos [?]: 565 [1]
Given Kudos: 3
Location: Canada
GPA: 3.7
Send PM
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: Between 1990 and 2000, the number of Americans aged 45 to 64 [#permalink] New post   11 Jun 2013, 17:35
1
Kudos
Hey,

I took a similar approach to the others, but since I assume most people aren't good at doing arithmetic, and even those who are usually aren't lighting fast, I think the following approximation is very useful:

When comparing 14/47 to 1/26, this can seem a little difficult. We can easily compare this though if we bring each of the bases to be around 100:

If we multiply 14/47 by 2/2, we can approximately 30/100.
If we multiply 1/26 by 4/4, we get something a tad smaller than 4/100.

The closest, by far, to <4 : 30, is 8.

Hope that helps.
User avatar
L
KarishmaB
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 14816
Own Kudos [?]: 64880 [1]
Given Kudos: 426
Location: Pune, India
Send PM
Re: Between 1990 and 2000, the number of Americans aged 45 to 64 [#permalink] New post   11 Jun 2013, 23:40
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
Nwsmith11 wrote:
While the answer was still right in the above post the numbers are reversed...but here's my approach, quick and simple:


Americans 45-64: Increase 47M to 61M
Americans 18-24: Decrease 26M to 25M

Percent change = \(\frac{New-Old}{Old}\)

So we have \(\frac{61-47}{47}\) and \(\frac{25-26}{25}\)

Our ratio becomes \(\frac{14}{47}\):\(\frac{1}{25}\) which leads us to a factor of 14 in the numerator and almost a factor of 2 in the denominator: Since the answer choices were 5, 6, 8, 10, and 14 we know that it must be either 6 or 8 (around 7) and since the denominator isn't quite a factor of 2 different then we would be closer to 8>>Answer C


Actually the post above had it right.

Change 45-64 = \(\frac{14}{47}\)
Change 18-24 = \(\frac{(25 - 26)}{26}\)

And yes, I would use the same approximation too.

\(14*\frac{26}{47}\)
26/47 is approx 1/2 but actually 2 is 1.8 or 1.9 something

When you divide 14 by 2, you get 7 but when you divide it by less than 2, you get more than 7. Hence 8 would be the answer.
avatar
suk1234
Intern
Intern
Joined: 29 Sep 2013
Posts: 38
Own Kudos [?]: 155 [2]
Given Kudos: 48
Send PM
Re: Between 1990 and 2000, the number of Americans aged 45 to 64 [#permalink] New post   26 Oct 2013, 02:23
1
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
deoljasms wrote:
Between 1990 and 2000, the number of Americans aged 45 to 64 was projected to increase from 47 million to 61 million, while the number of Americans aged 18 to 24 was projected to decrease from 26 million to 25 million. According to this projection, which of the following is closest to the ratio of the percent increase in the 45-to-64 age group to the percent decrease in the 18-to-24 age group?

A) 5 to 1
B) 6 to 1
C) 8 to 1
D) 10 to 1
E) 14 to 1

This question is from GMAT Focus.


Thirty Seconds approach:

increase in aged 45 to 64: 14 million in 47 or approximately 30%
decrease in aged 18 to 24: 1 million in 26 or approximately 4%

Therefore their ratio is 30%/4% = 7.5 to 1, which is nearest to C
User avatar
P
mvictor
Board of Directors
Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Posts: 2163
Own Kudos [?]: 1180 [0]
Given Kudos: 236
Location: United States (IL)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Schools: Stanford '20 (WD)
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V30
GPA: 3.92
WE:General Management (Transportation)
Send PM
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: Between 1990 and 2000, the number of Americans aged 45 to 64 [#permalink] New post   26 Sep 2016, 06:47
is there a faster way to solve this?
i got
14/47 % of increase
1/26 % of decrease

14/47 * 26/1 ~364/47
~7:1...but since we have decrease , then ~8:1...
User avatar
L
Abhishek009
Board of Directors
Joined: 11 Jun 2011
Status:QA & VA Forum Moderator
Posts: 6072
Own Kudos [?]: 4688 [0]
Given Kudos: 463
Location: India
GPA: 3.5
WE:Business Development (Commercial Banking)
Send PM
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Between 1990 and 2000, the number of Americans aged 45 to 64 [#permalink] New post   26 Sep 2016, 11:44
mvictor wrote:
is there a faster way to solve this?
i got
14/47 % of increase
1/26 % of decrease

14/47 * 26/1 ~364/47
~7:1...but since we have decrease , then ~8:1...


I will bat for suk1234 's Percentage approach...

That's the quickest way in my opinion...
avatar
B
Rocknrolla21
Intern
Intern
Joined: 16 Jul 2019
Posts: 41
Own Kudos [?]: 7 [1]
Given Kudos: 231
Schools: NUS '23
Send PM
Re: Between 1990 and 2000, the number of Americans aged 45 to 64 [#permalink] New post   25 Nov 2020, 13:02
1
Kudos
Hi, this is an official question. I got this question on one of the quant quizzes that I bought on mba.com.

Bunuel, request you to please tag the question.
User avatar
L
Bunuel
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 92875
Own Kudos [?]: 618550 [0]
Given Kudos: 81561
Send PM
CAT Tests Forum Quiz Mode
Re: Between 1990 and 2000, the number of Americans aged 45 to 64 [#permalink] New post   25 Nov 2020, 13:12
Expert Reply
Rocknrolla21 wrote:
Hi, this is an official question. I got this question on one of the quant quizzes that I bought on mba.com.

Bunuel, request you to please tag the question.


_______________
Done. Thank you.
GMAT Club Bot
gmatclubot
Re: Between 1990 and 2000, the number of Americans aged 45 to 64 [#permalink]
25 Nov 2020, 13:12
Moderators:
Bunuel
Math Expert
92875 posts
yashikaaggarwal
Senior Moderator - Masters Forum
3137 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne
Main navigation
GMAT Resources
Partners
MBA Resources
www.gmac.com|www.mba.com | | GMAT Club Rules | Terms and Conditions