Of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired : Critical Reasoning (CR)

goalsnr

Director

Joined: 03 Apr 2007

Posts: 632

Own Kudos [?]: 4800 [3]

Given Kudos: 10

Send PM

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

27 Jun 2008, 09:57

3

Kudos

Tot number of retiress = T
number of retirees moving to sunsstate = x
% of retirees moving to sunstate p = (x/T)*100
p decreases , if T increases ,x is constant
p decreases , if x decreases , T is constant
p deceases , if T increases , X increases (but the increase is not very high compared to T)

in 20007, T =100,x =20 , p= 20 %
in 2008, t =1000, , p = 10 %

to calculate x in 2008 : x = (1000*10)/100 = 100

The percentage of people moving is decreased but the actual number of people (x) moving has increased.

E

ritula

Director

Joined: 18 May 2008

Posts: 696

Own Kudos [?]: 2799 [4]

Given Kudos: 0

Send PM

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

23 Jan 2009, 09:20

3

Kudos

1

Bookmarks

This is a perfect example of percentage trap. The ans shld b E.
Suppose earlier no of ppl who migrated was 100 and % who retired to suncity was 10%. then their no is 10. But if the total no of ppl increased say to 1000 but % migrated to suncity decreased to 5%. so no of ppl retiring 2 suncity is 50 which is definitely more than earlier. I hope it is clear now

mariyea

Manager

Joined: 30 Nov 2010

Posts: 191

Own Kudos [?]: 266 [1]

Given Kudos: 66

Schools:UC Berkley, UCLA

GMAT 2: 540 GMAT 3: 530

Send PM

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

21 Jan 2011, 12:12

1

Kudos

ajit257 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.

Can someone tell me how to improve on my CR. Apparently i am doing ok in OG but I am being battered in mgmat exams. Please could someone help me out here. Thanks

Hello ajit,

It would be good if you had a good grasp of CR as a whole and I also believe that the Powerscore CR would definitely help you in that area.
After that just practicing would help improve your score. Try to find some LSAT exams with which to practice, it has difficult questions compared to those the GMAT has. So, yup I think that would help you.

Let's come to the q: The passage says "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."
Then it concludes the argument by saying, "Since many local businesses in SunState cater to retirees, this decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses."

The author assumes that the local businesses will suffer because there aren't that many retirees coming into Sunstate. What would weaken (or cause someone to doubt the conclusion) the argument is that the local businesses would not suffer a negative economic effect.

How do we show this? By showing that there is not that much of a significant change in the amount of retirees coming into the state.
The passage says that the number of retirees coming into the state has decreased by 10% it could mean that the original number is 100,000 (bringing the current number to 99,000) that's a significant change. Now what if the original number of retirees decreased from 100 retirees (now the number of retirees would become 90 - a decline of 10%).

E is correct because it says that the total number of retirees that moved to another state increased instead of decreased - so that would mean taht the percentage does not exactly represent a significant decrease, therefore the local businesses would not suffer a negative economic effect.

IMHO

HTH

Mari

getgyan

Senior Manager

Joined: 11 Jul 2012

Affiliations: SAE

Posts: 380

Own Kudos [?]: 962 [0]

Given Kudos: 269

Location: India

Concentration: Strategy, Social Entrepreneurship

Schools: Schulich '15 (A) Neeley '15 (M$)

GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37

GPA: 3.5

WE:Project Management (Energy and Utilities)

Send PM

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

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)

:-D

vmdce129907

Intern

Joined: 06 Mar 2012

Posts: 28

Own Kudos [?]: 153 [1]

Given Kudos: 12

Location: India

Concentration: Operations, International Business

GPA: 3.4

Send PM

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

29 Sep 2012, 06:05

1

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

MarkSullivan

Manhattan Prep Instructor

Joined: 08 May 2012

Posts: 51

Own Kudos [?]: 895 [4]

Given Kudos: 4

Location: United States

GMAT Focus 1:
775 Q90 V90 DI86 Verified score

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

29 Sep 2012, 14:10

3

Kudos

1

Bookmarks

Expert Reply

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)

:-D

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

getgyan

Senior Manager

Joined: 11 Jul 2012

Affiliations: SAE

Posts: 380

Own Kudos [?]: 962 [0]

Given Kudos: 269

Location: India

Concentration: Strategy, Social Entrepreneurship

Schools: Schulich '15 (A) Neeley '15 (M$)

GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37

GPA: 3.5

WE:Project Management (Energy and Utilities)

Send PM

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

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?
:-D

B

manimgoindown

Manager

Joined: 07 Feb 2011

Posts: 79

Own Kudos [?]: 288 [1]

Given Kudos: 47

Send PM

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

17 Mar 2013, 01:53

1

Kudos

This is a tricky question and I'm still not sure between A and E. Why is A wrong and E right. For me E being right requires an unncessary assumption on the part of the test taker which would assume that the number of retirees also increases in the sunstate...

That is really really iffy business. Why can we make such an assumption?

Vercules

Senior Manager

Joined: 23 Dec 2010

Status:Making every effort to create original content for you!!

Posts: 442

Own Kudos [?]: 5416 [1]

Given Kudos: 82

Location: United States

Concentration: Healthcare, Social Entrepreneurship

Schools: Kenan-Flagler '15 (A) McCombs '15 (I) Tepper '15 (M) Kellogg '15 (I) HBS '15 (D) Wharton '15 (D) Stern '15 (WL) Simon '15 (A)

GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V34

GMAT 2: 750 Q49 V42

Send PM

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

17 Mar 2013, 05:17

1

Kudos

Expert Reply

manimgoindowndown wrote:

This is a tricky question and I'm still not sure between A and E. Why is A wrong and E right. For me E being right requires an unncessary assumption on the part of the test taker which would assume that the number of retirees also increases in the sunstate...

That is really really iffy business. Why can we make such an assumption?

Hi manimgoindowndown,

We have to select an answer choice that will weaken the conclusion that decline in the proportion of people retiring to SunState will cause a negative economic effect on the business serving retired people

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.

Suppose were true then this would mean that the number people retiring to SunState is greater than those do retire in other state. Greater number is good, but we are comparing the number "in SunState" this year vs last year. Even if SunState attracts more retires than other states, it has seen a 10% decrease and this will cause a decline in local businesses. To sump up, (A) makes a wrong comparison between "SunState and other states", the correct answer should give some information about the number of retirees ""last years v/s this year"

E.The total number of people who retired and moved to another state for their retirement has increased significantly over the past five years.

If the total number of people who retired and moved to another state has increased then this means that the number of people corresponding to the proportion will also increase

Lets user numbers for this choice:

Lets say, last year, the total number of people retiring and moving to other states is 1000 and 100 of these are retiring to SunState. Now the proportion would be $\frac{100}{1000}$$\frac{*100}{1}$ = 10%

This year this proportion has decreased by 10%, i.e. the new proportion has now become 9% (=10% decrease in the proportion). Now according to (E) the total number has increased. Lets say that the total number has increased from 1000 to 1500. Now 9% of 1500 is 135. This number is greater than the previous 100. The total number doesn't have to be 1500, but (E) in fact (among all the choices) gives us the strongest reason to weaken the conclusion, even slightly.

If we want to prove that the conclusion is true for sure, then we need to make an assumption that the increase in the total number of retirees should be such that it offsets the 10% decrease in the proportion. We just need an additional evidence that will weaken the conclusion, this evidence may or may not destroy the conclusion.

Hope this helps,

Vercules

ssriva2

Manager

Joined: 22 Aug 2014

Posts: 100

Own Kudos [?]: 36 [0]

Given Kudos: 49

Send PM

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

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?
:-D

I used the same reasoning...I got the answer as B.
can someone explain why not B?

L

KarishmaB

Tutor

Joined: 16 Oct 2010

Posts: 14831

Own Kudos [?]: 64947 [2]

Given Kudos: 427

Location: Pune, India

Send PM

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

09 Apr 2015, 00:43

2

Bookmarks

Expert Reply

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?
:-D

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.

L

Skywalker18

Verbal Forum Moderator

Joined: 08 Dec 2013

Status:Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone

Posts: 2100

Own Kudos [?]: 8811 [0]

Given Kudos: 171

Location: India

Concentration: General Management, Strategy

GPA: 3.2

WE:Information Technology (Consulting)

Send PM

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

29 Jan 2016, 12:20

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 -Many of local business cater to in SunState cater to retirees
Conclusion- this decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses.
All the premises are about percentages , but the conclusion is about the actual number of retirees . Just because the percentage has decreased , the actual number need not decrease .

A. SunState attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state.
Irrelevant
B. There are far more local businesses in SunState that cater to tourists than there are local businesses that cater to retirees.
Out of Scope - Businesses that cater to tourists are outside the scope of the argument
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.
Strengthener
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
Correct Answer - The actual number of people who retired and moved to SunState could have remained same or increased .

Answer E

B

tryambaks

Manager

Joined: 24 Jul 2014

Posts: 71

Own Kudos [?]: 121 [0]

Given Kudos: 39

Location: India

WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)

Send PM

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

30 Jan 2016, 05:17

% and Total Amount problem

Argument talks about 10% decrease in retirees.
If this 10% decrease corresponds to a final number that is less than the that of previous year then local business has all the reasons to worry
Because for them revenue directly proportional to number retirees.

But If it is the case that % of retirees decrease but to final number does not !! then ? ? Local business has nothing to worry. their revenue is not going down anyway
And How can this happen ?
ONLY If the total number of retirees of the country increases

Last Year
Total 100
% of retiree to Sunstate = 30%
total retiree to Sunstate =30

This Year
Total 200
% of retirre to sunstate = 20%
total retiree to Sunstate = 40

40 >30

This is what needs to happen

Option E says something similar to this :
The total number of people who retired and moved to another state for their retirement has increased significantly over the past five years

Hence (E) is the answer

G

anairamitch1804

Director

Joined: 26 Oct 2016

Posts: 510

Own Kudos [?]: 3379 [0]

Given Kudos: 877

Location: United States

Concentration: Marketing, International Business

Schools: HBS '19

GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44

GPA: 4

WE:Education (Education)

Send PM

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

13 Apr 2017, 12:33

Conclusion : - decline in the percentage of retirees who relocate to SunState will have a negative impact on businesses there that cater to retirees.
Weaken :- decline in the percentage of retirees who relocate to SunState will not have a negative impact on businesses there that cater to retirees

option E fits the bill :-
It doesn't really matter if the proportion has decreased, as long as the physical number has increased. Say 5 years ago 500 people retired and moved out of state, out of which 50% or 250 came to SunState. If at present 5000 people retire and move to another state, out of which 40% come to SunState, then that means 2000 retirees. This is an eight-fold increase, which will surely positively impact the businesses.(We are only concerned with business that cater to retirees).

(B) The existence of other businesses in SunState that do not cater to retirees is
not relevant.

G

zac123

Manager

Joined: 21 May 2017

Posts: 59

Own Kudos [?]: 101 [0]

Given Kudos: 66

Location: India

GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31

Send PM

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

17 Oct 2018, 06:23

aaron22197 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.

In option E nothing about Sunstate is written , so how can we say that this is the correct option.

G

Skyline393

Manager

Joined: 04 Oct 2018

Posts: 121

Own Kudos [?]: 1034 [0]

Given Kudos: 141

Location: Viet Nam

Send PM

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

02 Apr 2019, 09:59

% retirement who moved to Sunstate = Total number of retirees who moved to Sunstate/ Total number of retirees .. If total number of retirees increased significantly and the total number of retirees moved to Sunstate is only a small increase=> There still has a decline in percentage =>In this case, the total no of retirement moved to Sunstate increases thus it positively impacts the economy of Sunstate=> Weaken
For example: 2005: Total no of retirees moved to Sunstate = 100 & Total no of retirees = 400 => % of retirees in Sunstate =25%...
In 2010, Total no of retirees moved to Sunstate increases to 150 & total no of retirees increased to 1000 => % of retirement in Sunstate = 150/1000 =15%
=> % of retirees in Sunstate decreased by 10%. But in fact, the total no of retirees moved to Sunstate still INCREASED then it had no impact to the Sunstate's economy.=> Thus E

B

dine5207

Intern

Joined: 21 Oct 2018

Posts: 43

Own Kudos [?]: 10 [0]

Given Kudos: 604

Location: India

Schools: ISB '21

Send PM

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

12 Apr 2021, 11:02

lately Bunuel is doing great job updating the all the official explanations

gmatclubot

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

12 Apr 2021, 11:02

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired