GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 16 Aug 2018, 18:28

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

Since the introduction of the Impanian National Health

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

Hide Tags

VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 1223
Schools: CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)
Since the introduction of the Impanian National Health  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 20 Sep 2017, 02:49
2
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  55% (hard)

Question Stats:

65% (02:05) correct 35% (02:53) wrong based on 327 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Since the introduction of the Impanian National Health Scheme, Impanians (or their private insurance companies) have had to pay only for the more unusual and sophisticated medical procedures. When the scheme was introduced, it was hoped that private insurance to pay for these procedures would be available at modest cost, since the insurers would no longer be paying for the bulk of health care costs, as they had done previously. Paradoxically, however, the cost of private health insurance did not decrease but has instead increased dramatically in the years since the scheme’s introduction.

Which one of the following, if true, does most to explain the apparently paradoxical outcome?

(A) The National Health scheme has greatly reduced the number of medical claims handled annually by Impania’s private insurers, enabling these firms to reduce overhead costs substantially.

(B) Before the National Health scheme was introduced, more than 80 percent of all Impanian medical costs were associated with procedures that are now covered by the scheme.

(C) Impanians who previously were unable to afford regular medical treatment now use the National Health scheme, but the number of Impanians with private health insurance has not increased.

(D) Impanians now buy private medical insurance only at times when they expect that they will need care of kinds not available in the National Health scheme.

(E) The proportion of total expenditures within Impania that is spent on health care has declined since the introduction of the National Health scheme.

Source: LSAT

_________________

The sky is the limit
800 is the limit


GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings


Originally posted by noboru on 22 May 2010, 10:45.
Last edited by broall on 20 Sep 2017, 02:49, edited 2 times in total.
Reformatted question
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 Jul 2009
Posts: 257
Re: Since the introduction of the Impanian National Health  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 May 2010, 12:21
noboru wrote:
Since the introduction of the Impanian National Health Scheme, Impanians (or their private insurance companies) have had to pay only for the more unusual and sophisticated medical procedures. When the scheme was introduced, it was hoped that private insurance to pay for these procedures would be available at modest cost, since the insurers would no longer be paying for the bulk of health care costs, as they had done previously. Paradoxically, however, the cost of private health insurance did not decrease but has instead increased dramatically in the years since the scheme’s introduction.
Which one of the following, if true, does most to explain the apparently paradoxical outcome?
(A) The National Health scheme has greatly reduced the number of medical claims handled annually by Impania’s private insurers, enabling these firms to reduce overhead costs substantially. >>> If Private insurers can cut the overheads, then cost should go down. This doesn't solve the paradox.
(B) Before the National Health scheme was introduced, more than 80 percent of all Impanian medical costs were associated with procedures that are now covered by the scheme. >>> Again if major chunks of isurances/claims are handled by NHI, cost of private health insurance should go down.
(C) Impanians who previously were unable to afford regular medical treatment now use the National Health scheme, but the number of Impanians with private health insurance has not increased. >>> IMO, Correct >>> If the number of cases handled by private health insurers remain same...then cost of private health insurance might not go down...!!
(D) Impanians now buy private medical insurance only at times when they expect that they will need care of kinds not available in the National Health scheme. >>> Refer to explanation for option B.
(E) The proportion of total expenditures within Impania that is spent on health care has declined since the introduction of the National Health scheme. >>> IMO, the cost of private health insurance should also go down.



Argument Simplified :Before National Health Insurance (NHI), cost of private health insurance was high.
Now after NHI, the cost of private health insurance should go down(Reason given : private insurance companies have to pay only for the more unusual and sophisticated medical procedures).BUT, the cost of private health insurance is still high.

Wats the OA.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 16 Mar 2010
Posts: 113
Location: Halifax, Canada
Schools: Dalhousie School of Business (Corporate Residency MBA)
Re: Since the introduction of the Impanian National Health  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 May 2010, 12:25
2
D, all the way:

noboru wrote:
Since the introduction of the Impanian National Health Scheme, Impanians (or their private insurance companies) have had to pay only for the more unusual and sophisticated medical procedures. When the scheme was introduced, it was hoped that private insurance to pay for these procedures would be available at modest cost, since the insurers would no longer be paying for the bulk of health care costs, as they had done previously. Paradoxically, however, the cost of private health insurance did not decrease but has instead increased dramatically in the years since the scheme’s introduction.
Which one of the following, if true, does most to explain the apparently paradoxical outcome?


(A) The National Health scheme has greatly reduced the number of medical claims handled annually by Impania’s private insurers, enabling these firms to reduce overhead costs substantially. Usually if you reduce overhead you're going to either lower prices or enjoy a wider margin. Price hikes are better associated with overhead cost increases. So this runs counter to the paradox.


(B) Before the National Health scheme was introduced, more than 80 percent of all Impanian medical costs were associated with procedures that are now covered by the scheme. This seems only to restate what we already know... it does give us a better number but doesn't help explain the paradox.

(C) Impanians who previously were unable to afford regular medical treatment now use the National Health scheme, but the number of Impanians with private health insurance has not increased. This doesn't make the case as to why private cost has gone up... if they kept their same customer base then why the need to hike prices, dramatically or otherwise?

(D) Impanians now buy private medical insurance only at times when they expect that they will need care of kinds not available in the National Health scheme. This puts forth a supply and demand theory that we should all be familiar with. Demand for private health care dropped drastically... in order to compensate, private firms jacked up their prices... especially now that the likelihood of someone making a claim is naturally higher! This answer gives us two reasons why the situation occurred. I like it.

(E) The proportion of total expenditures within Impania that is spent on health care has declined since the introduction of the National Health scheme. Clearly out of scope!
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 821
Name: Ronak Amin
Schools: IIM Lucknow (IPMX) - Class of 2014
Re: Since the introduction of the Impanian National Health  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 May 2010, 12:40
D for me too. same reasoning as above.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 Jul 2009
Posts: 257
Re: Since the introduction of the Impanian National Health  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 May 2010, 12:40
dalmba wrote:
D, all the way:

noboru wrote:
Since the introduction of the Impanian National Health Scheme, Impanians (or their private insurance companies) have had to pay only for the more unusual and sophisticated medical procedures. When the scheme was introduced, it was hoped that private insurance to pay for these procedures would be available at modest cost, since the insurers would no longer be paying for the bulk of health care costs, as they had done previously. Paradoxically, however, the cost of private health insurance did not decrease but has instead increased dramatically in the years since the scheme’s introduction.
Which one of the following, if true, does most to explain the apparently paradoxical outcome?


(A) The National Health scheme has greatly reduced the number of medical claims handled annually by Impania’s private insurers, enabling these firms to reduce overhead costs substantially. Usually if you reduce overhead you're going to either lower prices or enjoy a wider margin. Price hikes are better associated with overhead cost increases. So this runs counter to the paradox.


(B) Before the National Health scheme was introduced, more than 80 percent of all Impanian medical costs were associated with procedures that are now covered by the scheme. This seems only to restate what we already know... it does give us a better number but doesn't help explain the paradox.

(C) Impanians who previously were unable to afford regular medical treatment now use the National Health scheme, but the number of Impanians with private health insurance has not increased. This doesn't make the case as to why private cost has gone up... if they kept their same customer base then why the need to hike prices, dramatically or otherwise?

(D) Impanians now buy private medical insurance only at times when they expect that they will need care of kinds not available in the National Health scheme. This puts forth a supply and demand theory that we should all be familiar with. Demand for private health care dropped drastically... in order to compensate, private firms jacked up their prices... especially now that the likelihood of someone making a claim is naturally higher! This answer gives us two reasons why the situation occurred. I like it.

(E) The proportion of total expenditures within Impania that is spent on health care has declined since the introduction of the National Health scheme. Clearly out of scope!


On second thoughts, your explanation makes sense..!!
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 17 Feb 2010
Posts: 1259
Re: Since the introduction of the Impanian National Health  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 May 2010, 12:10
can someone explain the option (D) in more simple terms.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 16 Mar 2010
Posts: 113
Location: Halifax, Canada
Schools: Dalhousie School of Business (Corporate Residency MBA)
Re: Since the introduction of the Impanian National Health  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 May 2010, 13:09
seekmba wrote:
can someone explain the option (D) in more simple terms.

Insurance makes it money by assuming that of the X amount of people that buy its service, only a small % will actually make a claim and cost the firm money.

In D)s case, it's stated that it's much more likely that people would buy the private insurance "only at times when they expect that they will need care of kinds not available in the National Health scheme."

Essentially, this mens the previously small % I spoke of earlier is going to way up. In order remain profitable, the insurer needs to increase price to compensate for the increased risk inherent with each new customer.

To illustrate with oversimplified numbers, say your insurance costs $10. If you make a valid claim you get $10,000

This is good for the insurer if they have a million customers each carrying a 0.01% risk of claiming because they dish out $1,000,000 in claims and take in $10,000,000.

But if that risk goes up to say, 2% ... That's 20,000 claimants which cost the company... erk, $200,000,000. How does the company not go bankrupt in three seconds? The raise the cost until their margins are met. Going from .01% to 2% is like a 200x increase in risk, so that $10 you were paying before is going to turn into $2000 to get things back to the way they used to be.
Board of Directors
User avatar
P
Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Posts: 2717
Location: United States (IL)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V30
GPA: 3.92
WE: General Management (Transportation)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: Since the introduction of the Impanian National Health  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Dec 2015, 14:55
oh, wow, tough one. took some time to answer it. D is the clear winner. Looks like a "solve the paradox" kind of question.
it was expected the costs of private insurance to decrease, but in reality, it increased.
the only explanation that could be is that clients buy private insurance only when they actually need special kind of procedures not covered by the regular one. D says exactly this.
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
V
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 2105
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Kelley '20, ISB '19
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: Since the introduction of the Impanian National Health  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Dec 2017, 11:40
Since the introduction of the Impanian National Health Scheme, Impanians (or their private insurance companies) have had to pay only for the more unusual and sophisticated medical procedures. When the scheme was introduced, it was hoped that private insurance to pay for these procedures would be available at modest cost, since the insurers would no longer be paying for the bulk of health care costs, as they had done previously. Paradoxically, however, the cost of private health insurance did not decrease but has instead increased dramatically in the years since the scheme’s introduction.

Boil it down-The paradox is that now insurance companies don't have to pay for as many things as before, so they should in theory make their rates cheaper. But the opposite happens - even though they now pay for less, their rates have gone up!

Which one of the following, if true, does most to explain the apparently paradoxical outcome?

(A) The National Health scheme has greatly reduced the number of medical claims handled annually by Impania’s private insurers, enabling these firms to reduce overhead costs substantially.-- deepens paradox

(B) Before the National Health scheme was introduced, more than 80 percent of all Impanian medical costs were associated with procedures that are now covered by the scheme. -- deepens paradox

(C) Impanians who previously were unable to afford regular medical treatment now use the National Health scheme, but the number of Impanians with private health insurance has not increased. --doesn't seem too relevant. We don't care whether the number of people with private insurance has gone up or down. That doesn't (unless you bring in outside knowledge) explain why the price would change, so this is not the answer.

(D) Impanians now buy private medical insurance only at times when they expect that they will need care of kinds not available in the National Health scheme. --Now that normal people don't need private insurance for normal/average medical stuff, it's really only sick people or special people who need this special insurance. Therefore, all the ordinary people are going to drop out, and only people who need the procedures are going to get the insurance. So the insurance company may be paying out more relative to what it's taking in, since all the healthy people have gone to the National Health Plan.

(E) The proportion of total expenditures within Impania that is spent on health care has declined since the introduction of the National Health scheme. --doesn't go either way - we care about the insurance companies in particular, not about the general spending patterns in this mythical country.

Answer D
_________________

When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford
The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long
+1 Kudos if you find this post helpful

SVP
SVP
avatar
P
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 1854
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: Since the introduction of the Impanian National Health  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Jan 2018, 21:31
Although this question is a LSAT question, and the argument structure is quite complex, the question does sound like a gmat-like question.
Using POE, test takers can cross out A,B, and E.
C does not concern with why private insurances charge higher premiums.
Re: Since the introduction of the Impanian National Health &nbs [#permalink] 07 Jan 2018, 21:31
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Since the introduction of the Impanian National Health

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

Events & Promotions

PREV
NEXT


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| 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®.