saurabh9gupta wrote:
1. The passage suggests that the United States government’s policy towards providing wage supplements to parents whose wages are low is
(A) considered ill advised by most economists who have studied the issue
(B) based on assumptions about the appropriate sources of family income
(C) under revision in response to criticism from some policy analysts
(D) capable of eliminating wage inequality but not of raising incomes for both women and men
(E) applicable to single-parent families headed by women but not to single-parent families headed by men
For Q1.
I marked D because it is given in the passage but how is the answer B?
Passage
These policy analysts believe that <b> the problem is not caused primarily by wage inequity but rather by low wages coupled with single parent hood, regardless of sex.</b> As a solution, they challenge the government’s assumption that a family’s income should depend primarily on wages and urge the government to provide generous wage supplements (child and housing allowances) to single parents whose wages are low
Posted from my mobile device
Hi saurabh9gupta
I can understand why choice D seems appealing initially and why B does not. Let's go through the passage quickly:
1. Problem = great deal of poverty in the US among families headed by single women
2. Possible cause of the above problem = wage disparity between men and women
3. Possible solution by some economists that might substantially reduce the cause = enforce current laws rigorously so that wage inequality is reduced significantly
4. HOWEVER, drawback of suggested solution in 3 = does not affect situation where gender concentration exists
5. Therefore, some other economists suggest another solution = comparable worth
6. HOWEVER, policy analysts point out a consideration against comparable worth = comparable worth though will virtually equalize the pays, BUT not address the original issue listed in point 1
7. Policy analysts' conclusion = real cause of problem mentioned in 1 is not what economists have been trying to address, but something else; real cause = low wages
8.
Analysts' say government's assumption not correct; government's assumption = family's income should depend mostly on wages. In other words, the source of where the family income should primarily come from is disputed by the analysts.9.
Analysts solution = provide generous wage supplements to single parents whose wages are low
Question 1:
The passage suggests that the United States government’s policy towards providing wage supplements to parents whose wages are low is
(B) based on assumptions about the appropriate sources of family income
(D) capable of eliminating wage inequality but not of raising incomes for both women and men
As you can see from the passage map, wrt to
wage-supplements, which is the
focus of this question,
there is nothing in the passage about how "wage-supplements" would address wage inequality, leave alone eliminating it. The idea of "wage-supplements" is floated after disregarding "wage-inequality" as the cause of the problem of great deal of poverty in the US among families headed by single women.
Yes, we do read about virtually getting rid of wage-inequality, but that was from the POV of how successful the whole "comparable-worth" solution would be. This is the point that one is likely to miss initially and hence likely to choose choice D.As regards the validity of choice B, please refer to the last two points in the passage map and let me know whether there is still some confusion as to how we can infer it. Also, please keep in mind that choice B may not be perfectly worded (I feel so too), but the key to acing any section in Verbal is detaching oneself from the quest for perfection and surrendering many times to POE with logic.
Hope the above analysis helps!
Cheers!
NS