VeritasKarishma wrote:
nitesh50 wrote:
Hi
VeritasKarishmahttps://gmatclub.com/forum/following-a- ... 55470.htmlThis is a veritas prep Question.
I am really confused between option C and Option D.
The conclusion is: Busing campaign caused the increase in the voter registration and participation.
Why can't option C be a correct answer?
If voter turnout before the busing campaign was high, then we say that the busing campaign did not cause an increase in voter turnout.
If voter turnout before the busing campaign was low, then we can say that the busing campaign caused the turnout.
On the other hand Option D does state that the population was same demographically.
Basically, I thought that the other cities cannot provide me information relevant to the conclusion because the conditions at two different places might vary.
Can you please check my reasoning and tell me why option C is incorrect?
Regards
NItesh
Here Nitesh:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/following-a- ... l#p2208671Hi
VeritasKarishmaThank you for your explaination.
From what I have understood:
Since we are comparing SIMILAR precincts, in this question the answer option makes sense.
But then again I found another Veritas Prep question:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/the-recent-i ... 73300.htmlThe correct option is C.
This seems more of a paradox type question than a strengthen question(as stated in the solution)
Inspite of the high saving rate and people's reluctance to borrow, the credit card companies will be successful.
(C) Before credit card use was established in the rest of the country’s provinces, those provinces had a rate of discretionary income saving equal to or in excess of the rate currently found in Lijau.
In this case we are comparing one province to another. We are making a major assumption that all the provinces are the same. The option doesnot state that the provinces are the same. Then why is this option correct?
I straightaway eliminated this option because there were no similarities in the provinces of the region.
Then why is this option correct?
Now I went looking for some other questions that use this reasoning:
From 1998 to 2008, the amount of oil exported from the nation of Dettlandia increased by nearly 20% as the world’s demand soared. Yet over the same period, Dettlandia lost over 8,000 jobs in oil drilling and refinement, representing a 25% increase in the nation’s unemployment rate.
B) Several other countries in the region reported similar percentages of jobs lost in the oil industry over the same period.
Answer option B is incorrect. I eliminated this option because the countries in the region and Dettlandia are not similar. Hence we cannot even consider this option for explaination of the paradox.
If they were similar:
Then also IMO it would't explain the paradox. Just because it happened in other countries doesnot explain why it happened in Dettlandia.
(D) Lijau’s wealthiest citizens use credit cards heavily during their trips abroad.
Now this option still seems relevant to me. If from a small group of people, the credit card companies can extract a huge gains, then there are chances that they will be successful.
The only concern I had with the option was the frequency of the trips abroad.
Now both option C and Option D want the reader to make certain assumptions. Many times I get stuck on these type of options.
What Can I do to improve it?
Looking forward to your reply.
Thank you for your time.
Regards
Nitesh