Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 21:11 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 21:11
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
805+ Level|   Graphs|   Non-Math Related|      
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,390
Own Kudos:
778,390
 [3]
Given Kudos: 99,977
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,390
Kudos: 778,390
 [3]
The graph compares the number of post offices and the population in 02 Dec 2024, 09:04
Kudos
Add Kudos
3
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
00:00
Start Timer
Pause Timer
Resume Timer
Show Answer
Hide Answer
Hide
Show
History
Dropdown 1: 1,000 Dropdown 2: 3
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

41% (02:24) correct 59% (02:39) wrong based on 306 sessions

History

Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet



The graph compares the number of post offices and the population in the United States from 1790 to 2000. The white columns represent the number of post offices (in thousands), while the shaded columns represent the population (in millions).

Select from each drop-down menu the option that creates the most accurate statement, given the information provided.


The lowest number of people per post office in the United States during the study period was approximately .

The number of people per post office in the United States in 1950 was approximately times greater than that in 1900.
Submit Answer
Start the Timer above, select the dropdowns, and click "Submit" to add this question to your Error log.
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
Dropdown 1: 1,000 Dropdown 2: 3
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,390
Own Kudos:
778,390
Given Kudos: 99,977
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,390
Kudos: 778,390
The graph compares the number of post offices and the population in 04 Jan 2025, 03:00
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel



The graph compares the number of post offices and the population in the United States from 1790 to 2000. The white columns represent the number of post offices (in thousands), while the shaded columns represent the population (in millions).

Select from each drop-down menu the option that creates the most accurate statement, given the information provided.


The lowest number of people per post office in the United States during the study period was approximately .

The number of people per post office in the United States in 1950 was approximately times greater than that in 1900.
Show more

Official Solution:

Drop-down 1:

The lowest number of people per post office corresponds to the year where the white column (representing the number of post offices) is largest relative to the shaded column (representing the population). This ratio is highest in 1900, when the two columns are approximately equal in height. However, it is important to note that the white columns (number of post offices) are measured in thousands, while the shaded columns (population) are measured in millions. Therefore, a 1-to-1 height ratio on the graph translates to 1,000 people per post office.

Drop-down 2:

In 1950, the height of the shaded column is approximately 160, while the height of the white column is approximately 50, giving a ratio of 3.2. This translates to 3,200 people per post office. In 1900, the ratio of the shaded column to the white column is 1-to-1, which translates to 1,000 people per post office. Therefore, the number of people per post office in the United States in 1950 was approximately 3 times greater than in 1900.


Correct answer:

Dropdown 1: "1,000"

Dropdown 2: "3"
General Discussion
User avatar
Bismuth83
User avatar
DI Forum Moderator
Joined: 15 Sep 2024
Last visit: 01 Aug 2025
Posts: 719
Own Kudos:
2,606
 [1]
Given Kudos: 441
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 719
Kudos: 2,606
 [1]
The graph compares the number of post offices and the population in 05 Dec 2024, 10:13
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
1. The number of people per post office is the ratio between the gray and white columns.

2. This ratio is clearly least in 1900 and is equal to about 80,000,000:80,000 = 1,000:1 = 1000.

3. In 1950, the ratio is similar to 3:1 and with the units it's around 3000:1. This is approximately 3 times larger than in 1900.

4. Our answer will be: 1,000 and 3.
User avatar
JuniqueLid
User avatar
Joined: 04 Feb 2025
Last visit: 29 Oct 2025
Posts: 53
Own Kudos:
18
Given Kudos: 687
Products:
Forum Quiz
Posts: 53
Kudos: 18
The graph compares the number of post offices and the population in 19 Mar 2025, 18:41
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I think the second dropdown has an issue: the calculated result is 3:1. However, the question is asking "how many time GREATER" not "how many times that". So technically the answer should be 2 but the dropdown menu does not have 2 as an option.
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,390
Own Kudos:
778,390
Given Kudos: 99,977
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,390
Kudos: 778,390
The graph compares the number of post offices and the population in 20 Mar 2025, 00:18
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
JuniqueLid
I think the second dropdown has an issue: the calculated result is 3:1. However, the question is asking "how many time GREATER" not "how many times that". So technically the answer should be 2 but the dropdown menu does not have 2 as an option.
Show more

No, you are wrong.

Here is my post from another topic addressing this issue:

Agree that it's confusing but check below:

Merriam Webster's Dictionary of English Usage:

The argument in this case is that times more (or times larger, times stronger, times brighter, etc.) is ambiguous, so that "He has five times more money than you" can be misunderstood as meaning "He has six times as much money as you." It is, in fact, possible to misunderstand times more in this way, but it takes a good deal of effort. If you have $100, five times that is $500, which means that "five times more than $100" can mean (the commentators claim) "$500 more than $100," which equals "$600," which equals "six times as much as $100." The commentators regard this as a serious ambiguity, and they advise you to avoid it by always saying "times as much" instead of "times more." Here again, it seems that they are paying homage to mathematics at the expense of language. The fact is that "five times more" and "five times as much" are idiomatic phrases which have - and are understood to have - exactly the same meaning.

The "ambiguity" of times more is imaginary: in the world of actual speech and writing, the meaning of times more is clear and unequivocal. It is an idiom that has existed in our language for more than four centuries, and there is no real reason to avoid its use.

More on this here.

Also, check the following posts by Ianstewart:

Quote:
IanStewart
Quote:
ethanhunt007
Hi, I have an issue with the phrase "greater than"

If I say X is twice of Y, then it should mean --> X = 2Y
If I say X is two times greater than Y, shouldn't it mean --> X = 3Y

There seems to be some confusion about this earlier in this thread. The phrase "X is 2 times greater than Y" simply means that X = 2Y. It's understandable that this might seem confusing, because if instead we say "X is 200% greater than Y" we definitely mean that X = 3Y, but this all boils down to idiomatic usage in English. If you think of smaller numbers, it might be clear this is how the phrase is used in the language (there's a reason you've never heard anyone say "X is 1 times greater than Y" to mean that X is twice as big as Y), and it's also what the dictionary says, as quoted at this link:

https://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/61774.html
Show more
User avatar
JuniqueLid
User avatar
Joined: 04 Feb 2025
Last visit: 29 Oct 2025
Posts: 53
Own Kudos:
18
Given Kudos: 687
Products:
Forum Quiz
Posts: 53
Kudos: 18
The graph compares the number of post offices and the population in 20 Mar 2025, 00:58
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Thanks Bunuel, this is amazing. I hadn't seen these earlier posts but they are very helpful especially the dictionary reference. Learning sth new! Appreciated!
Bunuel
JuniqueLid
I think the second dropdown has an issue: the calculated result is 3:1. However, the question is asking "how many time GREATER" not "how many times that". So technically the answer should be 2 but the dropdown menu does not have 2 as an option.

No, you are wrong.

Here is my post from another topic addressing this issue:

Agree that it's confusing but check below:

Merriam Webster's Dictionary of English Usage:


The argument in this case is that times more (or times larger, times stronger, times brighter, etc.) is ambiguous, so that "He has five times more money than you" can be misunderstood as meaning "He has six times as much money as you." It is, in fact, possible to misunderstand times more in this way, but it takes a good deal of effort. If you have $100, five times that is $500, which means that "five times more than $100" can mean (the commentators claim) "$500 more than $100," which equals "$600," which equals "six times as much as $100." The commentators regard this as a serious ambiguity, and they advise you to avoid it by always saying "times as much" instead of "times more." Here again, it seems that they are paying homage to mathematics at the expense of language. The fact is that "five times more" and "five times as much" are idiomatic phrases which have - and are understood to have - exactly the same meaning.

The "ambiguity" of times more is imaginary: in the world of actual speech and writing, the meaning of times more is clear and unequivocal. It is an idiom that has existed in our language for more than four centuries, and there is no real reason to avoid its use.

More on this here.

Also, check the following posts by Ianstewart:

Quote:
IanStewart
Quote:
ethanhunt007
Hi, I have an issue with the phrase "greater than"

If I say X is twice of Y, then it should mean --> X = 2Y
If I say X is two times greater than Y, shouldn't it mean --> X = 3Y

There seems to be some confusion about this earlier in this thread. The phrase "X is 2 times greater than Y" simply means that X = 2Y. It's understandable that this might seem confusing, because if instead we say "X is 200% greater than Y" we definitely mean that X = 3Y, but this all boils down to idiomatic usage in English. If you think of smaller numbers, it might be clear this is how the phrase is used in the language (there's a reason you've never heard anyone say "X is 1 times greater than Y" to mean that X is twice as big as Y), and it's also what the dictionary says, as quoted at this link:

https://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/61774.html
Show more
Moderators:
Bunuel
Math Expert
105390 posts
kingbucky
496 posts