It is currently 22 Jan 2018, 14:32

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the - 2 Qs

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

Hide Tags

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 10 Sep 2005
Posts: 162
Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the - 2 Qs [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Oct 2005, 04:28
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Questions 1-2 are based on the following.

Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people in this country now report that they know someone who is unemployed.

Sharon: But a normal, moderate level of unemployment is 5 percent, with 1 out of 20 workers unemployed. So at any given time if a person knows approximately 50 workers, 1 or more will very likely be unemployed.

1. Sharon's argument is structured to lead to which of the following as a conclusion?

(A) The fact that 90% of the people know someone who is unemployed is not an indication that unemployment is abnormally high.
(B) The current level of unemployment is not moderate.
(C) If at least 5% of workers are unemployed, the result of questioning a representative group of people cannot be the percentage Roland cites.
(D) It is unlikely that the people whose statements Roland cites are giving accurate reports.
(E) If an unemployment figure is given as a certain percent, the actual percentage of those without jobs is even higher.

2. Sharon's argument relies on the assumption that

(A) normal levels of unemployment are rarely exceeded
(B) unemployment is not normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of the population
(C) the number of people who each know someone who is unemployed is always higher than 90% of the population
(D) Roland is not consciously distorting the statistics he presents
(E) knowledge that a personal acquaintance is unemployed generates more fear of losing one's job than does knowledge of unemployment statistics

Note:
1. These two questions are discussed separately in the following two topics. For reading and further discussions, please refer to the corresponding topic.
OG10#138: roland-the-alarming-fact-is-that-90-percent-of-the-og10-8416.html
OG10#139: roland-the-alarming-fact-is-that-90-percent-of-the-og10-9618.html
Here the first question is Q#138 from OG10 and second question is Q#139 from OG10.
2. The topic is locked as there should be one question per topic.


[Reveal] Spoiler:
1. A
2. B
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 574
Location: Canada eh
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Aug 2007, 04:14
ugh LOL, sorry - Let me edit that, I switched up the answers for the questions..... one sec
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 12 Jul 2007
Posts: 857
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Aug 2007, 04:19
StartupAddict wrote:
ugh LOL, sorry - Let me edit that, I switched up the answers for the questions..... one sec


hahaha! I imagine this will make things a lot more straightforward! I was really straining for my answers
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 22 May 2006
Posts: 179
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Aug 2007, 04:05
A, B for me
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 25 Jul 2007
Posts: 65
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Aug 2007, 11:45
A and
B for me too..
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 14 Feb 2005
Posts: 999
Location: New York
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Aug 2007, 07:27
StartupAddict wrote:
ugh LOL, sorry - Let me edit that, I switched up the answers for the questions..... one sec


OA please

I go with

1. A

2. B -- After multiple reads!
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 866
Schools: University of Chicago, Wharton School
Re: 2x OG10 CR [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Aug 2007, 07:43
StartupAddict wrote:
Questions 15-16 are based on the following.

Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people in this country now report that they know someone who is unemployed.


Sharon: But a normal, moderate level of unemployment is 5 percent, with 1 out of 20 workers unemployed. So at any given time if a person knows approximately 50 workers, 1 or more will very likely be unemployed.

15. Sharon's argument is structured to lead to which of the following as a conclusion?

(A) The fact that 90% of the people know someone who is unemployed is not an indication that unemployment is abnormally high.
(B) The current level of unemployment is not moderate.
(C) If at least 5% of workers are unemployed, the result of questioning a representative group of people cannot be the percentage Roland cites.
(D) It is unlikely that the people whose statements Roland cites are giving accurate reports.
(E) If an unemployment figure is given as a certain percent, the actual percentage of those without jobs is even higher.



Should be A here. Sharon is pleading that "90% of the people who know someone who is unemployed is not an indication that unemployment is abnormally high"
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 866
Schools: University of Chicago, Wharton School
Re: 2x OG10 CR [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Aug 2007, 07:45
StartupAddict wrote:
Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people in this country now report that they know someone who is unemployed.

Sharon: But a normal, moderate level of unemployment is 5 percent, with 1 out of 20 workers unemployed. So at any given time if a person knows approximately 50 workers, 1 or more will very likely be unemployed.


16. Sharon’s argument relies on the assumption that

(A) normal levels of unemployment are rarely exceeded
(B) unemployment is not normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of the population
(C) the number of people who each know someone who is unemployed is always higher than 90% of the population
(D) Roland is not consciously distorting the statistics he presents
(E) Knowledge that a personal acquaintance is unemployed generates more fear of losing one’s job than does knowledge of unemployment statistics


B. If unemployment is concentrated in geographically isolated segments of the population, then it were more than 5% and more serious.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 19 Jun 2007
Posts: 65
Re: 2x OG10 CR [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Aug 2007, 08:31
A
B
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 31 Mar 2007
Posts: 574
Location: Canada eh
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Aug 2007, 10:20
OA

A
B
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 398
Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 May 2008, 11:43
Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people in this country now report that they
know someone who is unemployed.

Sharon: But a normal, moderate level of unemployment is 5 percent, with 1 out of 20 workers
unemployed. So at any given time if a person knows approximately 50 workers, 1 or more will
very likely be unemployed.

1. Sharon's argument is structured to lead to which of the following as a conclusion?
(A) The fact that 90% of the people know someone who is unemployed is not an indication
that unemployment is abnormally high.
(B) The current level of unemployment is not moderate.
(C) If at least 5% of workers are unemployed, the result of questioning a representative
group of people cannot be the percentage Roland cites.
(D) It is unlikely that the people whose statements Roland cites are giving accurate reports.
(E) If an unemployment figure is given as a certain percent, the actual percentage of those
without jobs is even higher.

2. Sharon's argument relies on the assumption that
(A) normal levels of unemployment are rarely exceeded
(B) unemployment is not normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of the
population
(C) the number of people who each know someone who is unemployed is always higher
than 90% of the population
(D) Roland is not consciously distorting the statistics he presents
(E) knowledge that a personal acquaintance is unemployed generates more fear of losing
one's job than does knowledge of unemployment statistics

--------
Please leave your detail explanation.
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 535
Schools: Stern, McCombs, Marshall, Wharton
Re: CR: Roland vs Sharon [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 May 2008, 12:24
1. Sharon's argument is structured to lead to which of the following as a conclusion?

(A) The fact that 90% of the people know someone who is unemployed is not an indication
that unemployment is abnormally high.

Sharon argues that at a moderate level of unemployment the 90% statistic could still be correct. Therefore it cannot be a true indication that unemployment is high.

2. Sharon's argument relies on the assumption that

(B) unemployment is not normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of the
population

For Sharon's argument to hold true the moderate amount of unemployed people would have to be spread out in order to come in contact with 90% of the population.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Posts: 127
Re: CR: Roland vs Sharon [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 May 2008, 13:19
lexis wrote:
Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people in this country now report that they
know someone who is unemployed.
> Population size : 1000. 900 people say they know someone unemployed.

Sharon: But a normal, moderate level of unemployment is 5 percent, with 1 out of 20 workers
unemployed. So at any given time if a person knows approximately 50 workers, 1 or more will
very likely be unemployed.
> 1 out of 20 unemployed. If a person knows 50 1 or more likely to be unemployed.

1. Sharon's argument is structured to lead to which of the following as a conclusion?
(A) The fact that 90% of the people know someone who is unemployed is not an indication
that unemployment is abnormally high.
>> We are stretching the argument too far.
(B) The current level of unemployment is not moderate.
>> We dont know this.
(C) If at least 5% of workers are unemployed, the result of questioning a representative
group of people cannot be the percentage Roland cites.

(D) It is unlikely that the people whose statements Roland cites are giving accurate reports.
>> Irrelevant.
(E) If an unemployment figure is given as a certain percent, the actual percentage of those
without jobs is even higher.
>> Irrelevant

2. Sharon's argument relies on the assumption that
(A) normal levels of unemployment are rarely exceeded
>> Out of scope.
(B) unemployment is not normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of the
population

>> If it was concentrated in a particular segment of the population, then if we know 50 people its not necessary that 1 or more is unemployed. So this accurately reflects Sharon's assumption.
(C) the number of people who each know someone who is unemployed is always higher
than 90% of the population
> Out of scope.
(D) Roland is not consciously distorting the statistics he presents
> Irrelevant.
(E) knowledge that a personal acquaintance is unemployed generates more fear of losing
one's job than does knowledge of unemployment statistics
> out of scope.
--------
Please leave your detail explanation.
SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Posts: 1632
Location: Southern California
Schools: Chicago (dinged), Tuck (November), Columbia (RD)
Re: CR: Roland vs Sharon [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 May 2008, 17:48
A
_________________

Check out the new Career Forum
http://gmatclub.com/forum/133

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Posts: 774
Re: CR: Roland vs Sharon [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 May 2008, 18:16
1. A
Sharon believes that the statistics told by Roland are not the true indication of unemployement figure. Roland's argument fails to give true picture if 90% of the population knows the same guy, who is unemployed. In this case, the unemployment will be too low.


2. B

Sharon: But a normal, moderate level of unemployment is 5 percent, with 1 out of 20 workers
unemployed. So at any given time if a person knows approximately 50 workers, 1 or more will
very likely be unemployed.

This is possible only if the unemployed workers are not concentrated at a place.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 398
Re: CR: Roland vs Sharon [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 May 2008, 18:52
Well, after reading your explanation I reread the argument again, and understand that
Roland: 90% know
Sharon: at moderate level of unemployment is 5% (means 1/20) ==> If there are 51 persons (1 know 50) ==> at least 1 person is likely unemployment. May be over 90% know who is unemployment ===> A is the best choice in 1, and B can fulfill the requirement in 2.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Mar 2010
Posts: 116
Re: CR: Roland vs Sharon [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Sep 2010, 06:05
Hi I am unable to understand answer for second question(assumption)

Please explain!!!
1 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Posts: 327
Location: USA
WE 1: Engineering
Re: CR: Roland vs Sharon [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Sep 2010, 06:33
1
This post received
KUDOS
Quote:
Hi I am unable to understand answer for second question(assumption)

Please explain!!!



1. Sharon's argument is structured to lead to which of the following as a conclusion?

Sharon states than a moderate rate of umeployment is 5% and then justifies her statement (A) The fact that 90% of the people know someone who is unemployed is not an indication
that unemployment is abnormally high.

Actually Sharon is implying that it is normal (B) The current level of unemployment is not moderate.

Irrelevant (C) If at least 5% of workers are unemployed, the result of questioning a representative
group of people cannot be the percentage Roland cites.

Out of scope (D) It is unlikely that the people whose statements Roland cites are giving accurate reports.

Irrelevant (E) If an unemployment figure is given as a certain percent, the actual percentage of those
without jobs is even higher.

2. Sharon's argument relies on the assumption that

Irrelvant (A) normal levels of unemployment are rarely exceeded

This is the assumption. For example, if it was concentrated and the whoel country was seperated into two groups of 50 people: one group might not know anyone who is umployment and the other group might know 20 people that are umeployment (since it is concentrated) and in this case Sharon's generalized assumption is not correct (B) unemployment is not normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of the
population

Maybe true, but this is not Sharon's assumption it is more of ther conclusion (C) the number of people who each know someone who is unemployed is always higher
than 90% of the population

Irrelevant (D) Roland is not consciously distorting the statistics he presents

Irrelevant (E) knowledge that a personal acquaintance is unemployed generates more fear of losing
one's job than does knowledge of unemployment statistics
_________________

All things are possible to those who believe.

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 04 Aug 2010
Posts: 151
Re: CR: Roland vs Sharon [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Sep 2010, 18:47
adishail wrote:
Quote:
Hi I am unable to understand answer for second question(assumption)

Please explain!!!



1. Sharon's argument is structured to lead to which of the following as a conclusion?

Sharon states than a moderate rate of umeployment is 5% and then justifies her statement (A) The fact that 90% of the people know someone who is unemployed is not an indication
that unemployment is abnormally high.

Actually Sharon is implying that it is normal (B) The current level of unemployment is not moderate.

Irrelevant (C) If at least 5% of workers are unemployed, the result of questioning a representative
group of people cannot be the percentage Roland cites.

Out of scope (D) It is unlikely that the people whose statements Roland cites are giving accurate reports.

Irrelevant (E) If an unemployment figure is given as a certain percent, the actual percentage of those
without jobs is even higher.

2. Sharon's argument relies on the assumption that

Irrelvant (A) normal levels of unemployment are rarely exceeded

This is the assumption. For example, if it was concentrated and the whoel country was seperated into two groups of 50 people: one group might not know anyone who is umployment and the other group might know 20 people that are umeployment (since it is concentrated) and in this case Sharon's generalized assumption is not correct (B) unemployment is not normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of the
population

Maybe true, but this is not Sharon's assumption it is more of ther conclusion (C) the number of people who each know someone who is unemployed is always higher
than 90% of the population

Irrelevant (D) Roland is not consciously distorting the statistics he presents

Irrelevant (E) knowledge that a personal acquaintance is unemployed generates more fear of losing
one's job than does knowledge of unemployment statistics


good explanation. thanks
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2011
Posts: 125
Location: United States
Reviews Badge
Re: CR: Roland vs Sharon [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Nov 2011, 06:23
adishail wrote:
Quote:
Hi I am unable to understand answer for second question(assumption)

Please explain!!!



1. Sharon's argument is structured to lead to which of the following as a conclusion?

Sharon states than a moderate rate of umeployment is 5% and then justifies her statement (A) The fact that 90% of the people know someone who is unemployed is not an indication
that unemployment is abnormally high.

Actually Sharon is implying that it is normal (B) The current level of unemployment is not moderate.

Irrelevant (C) If at least 5% of workers are unemployed, the result of questioning a representative
group of people cannot be the percentage Roland cites.

Out of scope (D) It is unlikely that the people whose statements Roland cites are giving accurate reports.

Irrelevant (E) If an unemployment figure is given as a certain percent, the actual percentage of those
without jobs is even higher.

2. Sharon's argument relies on the assumption that

Irrelvant (A) normal levels of unemployment are rarely exceeded

This is the assumption. For example, if it was concentrated and the whoel country was seperated into two groups of 50 people: one group might not know anyone who is umployment and the other group might know 20 people that are umeployment (since it is concentrated) and in this case Sharon's generalized assumption is not correct (B) unemployment is not normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of the
population

Maybe true, but this is not Sharon's assumption it is more of ther conclusion (C) the number of people who each know someone who is unemployed is always higher
than 90% of the population

Irrelevant (D) Roland is not consciously distorting the statistics he presents

Irrelevant (E) knowledge that a personal acquaintance is unemployed generates more fear of losing
one's job than does knowledge of unemployment statistics



Hi,
Can you explain, why C cannot be the answer for the first question.
I mean, probably, A sounds as a better answer because it is assumed that, probably, Sharon wants to contradict the point directly stated by Ronald(i.e. 90% reporting is very high).
But, where does Ronald say it is very high. He says it is alarming, doesn't mean high/low, right?
But, C is a little neutral, meaning, it actually checks something like this:
Sharon checks with Ron, "If what I say is right,(i.e. 5% unemployment), then it is possibly not the group that you(Ron) are talking about, isn't it?
But, I feel, structurally, it should lead to A, and C, might just be in the process to reach A, probably? But, please explain/clarify...
Thanks in advance!
BSchool Forum Moderator
avatar
Status: Flying over the cloud!
Joined: 16 Aug 2011
Posts: 889
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: International Business, Marketing
GMAT Date: 06-06-2014
GPA: 3.07
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Nov 2011, 07:28
lexis wrote:
Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people in this country now report that they
know someone who is unemployed.

Sharon: But a normal, moderate level of unemployment is 5 percent, with 1 out of 20 workers
unemployed. So at any given time if a person knows approximately 50 workers, 1 or more will
very likely be unemployed.

1. Sharon's argument is structured to lead to which of the following as a conclusion?
(A) The fact that 90% of the people know someone who is unemployed is not an indication
that unemployment is abnormally high. => Clearly correct.

2. Negate it.
(B) unemployment is normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of the
population => if Roland report from the region of population in which the unemployment focus on, the rate of unemployment will be very high. Support Roland and Weaken the reasoning of Sharon


--------
Please leave your detail explanation.

_________________

Rules for posting in verbal gmat forum, read it before posting anything in verbal forum
Giving me + 1 kudos if my post is valuable with you :)

The more you like my post, the more you share to other's need

CR: Focus of the Week: Must be True Question

Re: Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people   [#permalink] 13 Nov 2011, 07:28

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3    Next  [ 50 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the - 2 Qs

  post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


cron

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

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®.