It is currently 17 Oct 2017, 21:21

### 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

# SC - Poverty

Author Message
Manager
Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Posts: 201

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

19 Sep 2008, 18:43
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

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

### HideShow timer Statistics

Let's solve this...

Demographers doing research for an international economics newsletter claim that the average per capita income in the country of Kuptala is substantially lower than that in the country of Bahlton. They also claim, however, that whereas poverty is relatively rare in Kuptala, over half the population of Bahlton lives in extreme poverty. At least one of the demographers’ claims must, therefore, be wrong.

The argument above is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?

(A) It rejects an empirical claim about the average per capita incomes in the two countries without making any attempt to discredit that claim by offering additional economic evidence.
(B) It treats the vague term “poverty” as though it had a precise and universally accepted meaning.
(C) It overlooks the possibility that the number of people in the two countries who live in poverty could be the same even though the percentages of the two populations that live in poverty differ markedly.
(D) It fails to show that wealth and poverty have the same social significance in Kuptala as in Bahlton.
(E) It does not consider the possibility that incomes in Kuptala, unlike those in Bahlton, might all be very close to the country’s average per capita income.

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 28 Feb 2007
Posts: 300

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2008, 01:08
E.

Conclusion: "At least one of the demographers’ claims must, therefore, be wrong"

Choice E makes clear that Standard deviation of income in country K may be significantly less than that in country B. What if the remaining portion of popultation in B is all billionaire. If so, then 2 claims of demographers still hold.

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 30 Jun 2008
Posts: 1033

Kudos [?]: 704 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2008, 09:08
Richardson wrote:
Let's solve this...

Demographers doing research for an international economics newsletter claim that the average per capita income in the country of Kuptala is substantially lower than that in the country of Bahlton. They also claim, however, that whereas poverty is relatively rare in Kuptala, over half the population of Bahlton lives in extreme poverty. At least one of the demographers’ claims must, therefore, be wrong.

The argument above is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?

(A) It rejects an empirical claim about the average per capita incomes in the two countries without making any attempt to discredit that claim by offering additional economic evidence.
(B) It treats the vague term “poverty” as though it had a precise and universally accepted meaning.
(C) It overlooks the possibility that the number of people in the two countries who live in poverty could be the same even though the percentages of the two populations that live in poverty differ markedly.
(D) It fails to show that wealth and poverty have the same social significance in Kuptala as in Bahlton.
(E) It does not consider the possibility that incomes in Kuptala, unlike those in Bahlton, might all be very close to the country’s average per capita income.

Wow ! this is a tough one !

can someone explain why other options are wrong ??

thanks
_________________

"You have to find it. No one else can find it for you." - Bjorn Borg

Kudos [?]: 704 [0], given: 1

Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Apr 2008
Posts: 429

Kudos [?]: 164 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2008, 09:35
Richardson wrote:
Let's solve this...

Demographers doing research for an international economics newsletter claim that the average per capita income in the country of Kuptala is substantially lower than that in the country of Bahlton. They also claim, however, that whereas poverty is relatively rare in Kuptala, over half the population of Bahlton lives in extreme poverty. At least one of the demographers’ claims must, therefore, be wrong.

The argument above is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?

(A) It rejects an empirical claim about the average per capita incomes in the two countries without making any attempt to discredit that claim by offering additional economic evidence.
(B) It treats the vague term “poverty” as though it had a precise and universally accepted meaning.
(C) It overlooks the possibility that the number of people in the two countries who live in poverty could be the same even though the percentages of the two populations that live in poverty differ markedly.
(D) It fails to show that wealth and poverty have the same social significance in Kuptala as in Bahlton.
(E) It does not consider the possibility that incomes in Kuptala, unlike those in Bahlton, might all be very close to the country’s average per capita income.

A) -> Does offer other evidence about poverty so not correct
B) -> The term is same for both countries so not correct
C) -> Talkin about average per capita income so percentage do matter. Not correct
D) -> Wealth is out of scope.
E) -> Correct. If this is true then Kuptala has incomes closer to average whereas Bahlton has varied income which can account for extreme poverty.

Kudos [?]: 164 [0], given: 1

VP
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1402

Kudos [?]: 437 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2008, 10:46
amitdgr wrote:
Richardson wrote:
Let's solve this...

Demographers doing research for an international economics newsletter claim that the average per capita income in the country of Kuptala is substantially lower than that in the country of Bahlton. They also claim, however, that whereas poverty is relatively rare in Kuptala, over half the population of Bahlton lives in extreme poverty. At least one of the demographers’ claims must, therefore, be wrong.

The argument above is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?

(A) It rejects an empirical claim about the average per capita incomes in the two countries without making any attempt to discredit that claim by offering additional economic evidence.
(B) It treats the vague term “poverty” as though it had a precise and universally accepted meaning.
(C) It overlooks the possibility that the number of people in the two countries who live in poverty could be the same even though the percentages of the two populations that live in poverty differ markedly.
(D) It fails to show that wealth and poverty have the same social significance in Kuptala as in Bahlton.
(E) It does not consider the possibility that incomes in Kuptala, unlike those in Bahlton, might all be very close to the country’s average per capita income.

Wow ! this is a tough one !

can someone explain why other options are wrong ??

thanks

Avg per capita income = Total income of all people in country / Number of people

ACI (K) < ACI (B)

But

P (K) < P (B)

How can this happen? This can happen if

There are NOT many rich and many poor people in K and most of them are avg Joe Bloggs who are with in a strike of ACI

Kudos [?]: 437 [0], given: 1

VP
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1374

Kudos [?]: 406 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2008, 11:05
Richardson wrote:
Let's solve this...

Demographers doing research for an international economics newsletter claim that the average per capita income in the country of Kuptala is substantially lower than that in the country of Bahlton. They also claim, however, that whereas poverty is relatively rare in Kuptala, over half the population of Bahlton lives in extreme poverty. At least one of the demographers’ claims must, therefore, be wrong.

The argument above is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?

(A) It rejects an empirical claim about the average per capita incomes in the two countries without making any attempt to discredit that claim by offering additional economic evidence.
(B) It treats the vague term “poverty” as though it had a precise and universally accepted meaning.
(C) It overlooks the possibility that the number of people in the two countries who live in poverty could be the same even though the percentages of the two populations that live in poverty differ markedly.
(D) It fails to show that wealth and poverty have the same social significance in Kuptala as in Bahlton.
(E) It does not consider the possibility that incomes in Kuptala, unlike those in Bahlton, might all be very close to the country’s average per capita income.

E is good -> if the wealth were unevenly distributed in kuptala then inspite of lower average per capita income ,number of people below poverty line is lower
C -> is close but actually argument is not bothered about number of people since it takes this parameter in saying average per capita income -> out

Good question
_________________

cheers
Its Now Or Never

Kudos [?]: 406 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 30 Jun 2008
Posts: 1033

Kudos [?]: 704 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2008, 12:11
icandy wrote:
Avg per capita income = Total income of all people in country / Number of people

ACI (K) < ACI (B)

But

P (K) < P (B)

How can this happen? This can happen if

There are NOT many rich and many poor people in K and most of them are avg Joe Bloggs who are with in a strike of ACI

Thanks for the explanation
_________________

"You have to find it. No one else can find it for you." - Bjorn Borg

Kudos [?]: 704 [0], given: 1

Re: SC - Poverty   [#permalink] 20 Sep 2008, 12:11
Display posts from previous: Sort by