Politician: From the time our party took office almost four : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 27 Feb 2017, 05:01

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Politician: From the time our party took office almost four

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 874
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 119 [0], given: 0

Politician: From the time our party took office almost four [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Mar 2007, 07:05
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Politician: From the time our party took office almost four years ago the number of people unemployed city-wide increased by less than 20 percent. The opposition party controlled city government during the four preceding years, and the number of unemployed city residents rose by over 20 percent. Thus, due to our leadership, fewer people now find themselves among the ranks of the unemployed, whatever the opposition may claim.

The reasoning in the politicianâ€™s argument is most vulnerable to the criticism that
(A) the claims made by the opposition are simply dismissed without being specified
(B) no evidence has been offered to show that any decline in unemployment over the past four years was uniform throughout all areas of the city
(C) the issue of how much unemployment in the city is affected by seasonal fluctuations is ignored
(D) the evidence cited in support of the conclusion actually provides more support for the denial of the conclusion
(E) the possibility has not been addressed that any increase in the number of people employed is due to programs supported by the opposition party

Please give reasons for ur choices...
If you have any questions
you can ask an expert
New!
VP
Joined: 06 Feb 2007
Posts: 1023
Followers: 22

Kudos [?]: 181 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

22 Mar 2007, 07:34
I'd go for E. The previous government might have implemented policies that in long term decreased the unemployment figures.
Manager
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Posts: 56
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

22 Mar 2007, 07:47
I think the answer is D.

The politician first says that the number of unemployed increased by under 20%. But then he tries to claim that the total number of unemployed decreased. Even if the percentage increase while he was in power was smaller than his predecessors, it's still an increase. The evidence he cites actually shows that more people now find themselves unemployed, not less.
Manager
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 165
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

22 Mar 2007, 07:50
I think it D.

Suppose there were 100 unemployed people when the opposition took office. The unemployment increased by 20% - so 120 unemployed people at end of the term.
Now when politican's party took office, unemployment increased by less than 20%. even if we assume it was 0%, the number of employed people would remain constant. The politician's argument does not give any concrete evidence that supports that inference that the unemployment decreased and that now there are fewer unemployed people.

Hence (D)
VP
Joined: 06 Feb 2007
Posts: 1023
Followers: 22

Kudos [?]: 181 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

22 Mar 2007, 13:27
You guys are right. The answer has to be D.
Manager
Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Posts: 212
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

22 Mar 2007, 13:34
Four year ago, the rate of unemplyment is 20%, and now 20%+10%=30%.

(D) the evidence cited in support of the conclusion actually provides more support for the denial of the conclusion
Director
Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 874
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 119 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

23 Mar 2007, 20:51
You guys are the best...The OA is D indeed.
This is a good example of the percentage trap(I got caught in it).
23 Mar 2007, 20:51
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 Personnel officer: The exorbitant cost of our health-insuran 2 04 Jan 2014, 16:21
6 Politician: My opponent says our zoning laws too strongly 9 12 Aug 2012, 17:10
15 Politician: Since my administration has entered office, the 10 06 Jun 2011, 00:14
5 Politician: From the time our party took office almost four 13 08 Feb 2010, 07:24
15 Personnel officer: The exorbitant cost of our 12 14 Oct 2007, 08:18
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Politician: From the time our party took office almost four

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.