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

 It is currently 20 Oct 2019, 01:48

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

The national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between 2004 and 2008

Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Current Student
Joined: 04 Jan 2016
Posts: 163
Location: United States (NY)
GMAT 1: 620 Q44 V32
GMAT 2: 600 Q48 V25
GMAT 3: 660 Q42 V39
GPA: 3.48
The national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between 2004 and 2008  [#permalink]

Show Tags

01 May 2017, 15:41
2
16
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

23% (01:08) correct 77% (01:04) wrong based on 222 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

The national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between 2004 and 2008, nearly double as much as the previous four years.

(A) double as much as
(B) double
(C) doubling the increase in
(D) twice that of
(E) doubling the increase of

Question GMAT Experts:
Can the increase of in option E be compared to the verb rose in the original sentence?

Current Student
Joined: 04 Jan 2016
Posts: 163
Location: United States (NY)
GMAT 1: 620 Q44 V32
GMAT 2: 600 Q48 V25
GMAT 3: 660 Q42 V39
GPA: 3.48
Re: The national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between 2004 and 2008  [#permalink]

Show Tags

02 May 2017, 16:09
1
Hello
My request is been mentioned on the question. I really appreciate if an expert helps me with the concept.
Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2861
Location: Germany
Schools: German MBA
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: The national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between 2004 and 2008  [#permalink]

Show Tags

05 May 2017, 01:39
Heseraj wrote:
Hello
My request is been mentioned on the question. I really appreciate if an expert helps me with the concept.

There is no comparison structure in option E. The part "doubling the increase of...." is a present participle modifier. You would probably have learnt that a present participle modifier separated by a comma refers to the whole preceding clause. Here this modifier "doubling the increase of...." refers to the whole clause "The national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between 2004 and 2008". The noun "increase" is not compoared to the verb "rose" as you mentioned.
Current Student
Joined: 04 Jan 2016
Posts: 163
Location: United States (NY)
GMAT 1: 620 Q44 V32
GMAT 2: 600 Q48 V25
GMAT 3: 660 Q42 V39
GPA: 3.48
Re: The national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between 2004 and 2008  [#permalink]

Show Tags

05 May 2017, 16:32
1
Thank you very much.

Of course, tired eyes of mine and exhausted brain couldn't realize it.
Director
Joined: 26 Aug 2016
Posts: 581
Location: India
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V33
GMAT 2: 700 Q50 V33
GMAT 3: 730 Q51 V38
GPA: 4
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Re: The national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between 2004 and 2008  [#permalink]

Show Tags

06 May 2017, 00:49
1
Hi sayantanc2k, Can you please tell me when to use increase of and when to use Increase in.
Sorry, This might sound basic.
Here, in the above question i chose C rather than choosing E.
Thank you.
Retired Moderator
Joined: 18 Dec 2014
Posts: 357
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V45
GPA: 3.85
WE: Design (Energy and Utilities)
Re: The national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between 2004 and 2008  [#permalink]

Show Tags

06 May 2017, 02:34
Has option C been ruled out because it's unidiomatic? Can you elaborate on 'increase in' vs 'increase of', and explain why 'increase of' is correct here? TIA.
_________________
12345aBcDeFgHiJkLmNoPqRsTuVwXyZ67890
Intern
Joined: 21 Jan 2017
Posts: 31
Re: The national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between 2004 and 2008  [#permalink]

Show Tags

06 May 2017, 04:28
Heseraj wrote:
The national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between 2004 and 2008, nearly double as much as the previous four years.

(A) double as much as
(B) double
(C) doubling the increase in
(D) twice that of
(E) doubling the increase of

Question GMAT Experts:
Can the increase of in option E be compared to the verb rose in the original sentence?

Stuck between C and E. Would anyone please explain the difference between increase of and increase in?
Manager
Joined: 04 Oct 2015
Posts: 234
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 730 Q51 V36
GPA: 3.56
The national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between 2004 and 2008  [#permalink]

Show Tags

07 May 2017, 06:25
Please explain why the increase in in C is wrong, but the increase of in E is right!

Many thanks!
_________________
Do not pray for an easy life, pray for the strength to endure a difficult one - Bruce Lee
Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2861
Location: Germany
Schools: German MBA
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
The national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between 2004 and 2008  [#permalink]

Show Tags

08 May 2017, 06:02
Nightmare007 wrote:
Hi sayantanc2k, Can you please tell me when to use increase of and when to use Increase in.
Sorry, This might sound basic.
Here, in the above question i chose C rather than choosing E.
Thank you.

leanhdung wrote:
Please explain why the increase in in C is wrong, but the increase of in E is right!

Many thanks!

DigitsnLetters wrote:
Has option C been ruled out because it's unidiomatic? Can you elaborate on 'increase in' vs 'increase of', and explain why 'increase of' is correct here? TIA.

umabharatigudipalli wrote:
Heseraj wrote:
The national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between 2004 and 2008, nearly double as much as the previous four years.

(A) double as much as
(B) double
(C) doubling the increase in
(D) twice that of
(E) doubling the increase of

Question GMAT Experts:
Can the increase of in option E be compared to the verb rose in the original sentence?

Take a hypothetical case:
Value at year 1 beginning = 100
Increase in year 1 = 10
Value at year 2 beginning = 110
Increase in year 2 = 12
Value at year 3 beginning = 122
Increase in year 3 = 14
Value at year 4 beginning = 136
Increase in year 4 = 16
Value at year 5 (current) beginning = 152[/u]
Increase in year 5 (current) = ??

Case I: Doubling the increase IN last 4 years --->
Meaning 1: The "increase" doubled IN last four years ("IN" is an adverb for the verb "double"). The increase was 10 four years ago. Thus this year the increase is 10 x 2 = 20. Thus value at year end 5 = 152 + 20 = 172.
Meaning 2: The "increase" IN last four years doubled ("IN last four years" is a prepositional phrase modifier for the noun "increase"). The increase IN last 4 years was = 10+12+14+16 = 52. Thus this year the increase is 52 x 2 = 104. Thus value at year end 5 = 152 + 104 = 256.
Thus there is an ambiguity in meaning if one uses "IN" (the increase could be 20 or 104 - not clear).

Case II: Doubling the increase OF last 4 years ---> The "increase" OF last four years doubled ("OF last four years" is a prepositional phrase modifier for the noun "increase"). The increase OF last four years is 10+12+14+16 = 52. Thus this year the increase is 52 x 2 = 104. Thus value at year end 5 = 152 + 104 = 256.
There is no ambuity in meaning. ("The increase doubled OF last four years" does not make sense.)

Hence OF is better than IN in this case.
Retired Moderator
Joined: 18 Dec 2014
Posts: 357
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V45
GPA: 3.85
WE: Design (Energy and Utilities)
Re: The national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between 2004 and 2008  [#permalink]

Show Tags

08 May 2017, 22:10
sayantanc2k wrote:
Take a hypothetical case:
Value at year 1 beginning = 100
Increase in year 1 = 10
Value at year 2 beginning = 110
Increase in year 2 = 12
Value at year 3 beginning = 122
Increase in year 3 = 14
Value at year 4 beginning = 136
Increase in year 4 = 16
Value at year 5 (current) beginning = 152[/u]
Increase in year 5 (current) = ??

Case I: Doubling the increase IN last 4 years --->
Meaning 1: The "increase" doubled IN last four years ("IN" is an adverb for the verb "double"). The increase was 10 four years ago. Thus this year the increase is 10 x 2 = 20. Thus value at year end 5 = 152 + 20 = 172.
Meaning 2: The "increase" IN last four years doubled ("IN last four years" is a prepositional phrase modifier for the noun "increase"). The increase IN last 4 years was = 10+12+14+16 = 52. Thus this year the increase is 52 x 2 = 104. Thus value at year end 5 = 152 + 104 = 256.
Thus there is an ambiguity in meaning if one uses "IN" (the increase could be 20 or 104 - not clear).

Case II: Doubling the increase OF last 4 years ---> The "increase" OF last four years doubled ("OF last four years" is a prepositional phrase modifier for the noun "increase"). The increase OF last four years is 10+12+14+16 = 52. Thus this year the increase is 52 x 2 = 104. Thus value at year end 5 = 152 + 104 = 256.
There is no ambuity in meaning. ("The increase doubled OF last four years" does not make sense.)

Hence OF is better than IN in this case.

I don't feel there is any ambiguity if we use 'doubling the increase in'.

Here's the statement: The national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between 2004 and 2008, nearly doubling the increase in the previous four years.

The above statement clearly says that the increase in the previous four years has nearly doubled. Thus, national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between years 2004 and 2008, nearly doubling the increase in the past four years, i.e. if the increase in last four years, 2000-2004, was X (say), then the increase between 2004-2008 would be 2X!

Per your explanation, Case I: Doubling the increase IN last 4 years --->
Meaning 1: The "increase" doubled IN last four years ("IN" is an adverb for the verb "double"). The increase was 10 four years ago. Thus this year the increase is 10 x 2 = 20. Thus value at year end 5 = 152 + 20 = 172.

I feel there is an error here. Why are we only considering one particular year? The prompt specifically mentions 'last four years' and not 'fourth last year'. Isn't is error-some to consider just 10 and not 52 instead? The meaning-2 is the only meaning that can be correctly inferred out of the given statement. Hence, 'doubling the increase in' should be correct.

Is my understanding correct? Or, am I missing some key point here?
_________________
12345aBcDeFgHiJkLmNoPqRsTuVwXyZ67890
Intern
Joined: 06 May 2015
Posts: 39
Re: The national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between 2004 and 2008  [#permalink]

Show Tags

09 May 2017, 00:19
ANS D)

Replacing "double as much as" with Twice that of is more concise and grammatical.

Also Twice that of previous four year correctly compares the profit between 2004-2008 and profit four years before that.

Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum
Intern
Joined: 10 Sep 2018
Posts: 49
GMAT 1: 740 Q50 V40
GPA: 3.8
Re: The national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between 2004 and 2008  [#permalink]

Show Tags

08 Mar 2019, 03:25
E is the only option that correctly refers to the increase that happened in the last four years.
Intern
Joined: 08 Jul 2018
Posts: 3
Re: The national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between 2004 and 2008  [#permalink]

Show Tags

19 Mar 2019, 02:45
Why D could not be the OA?

'Twice that of' makes complete sense. Please explain.
Re: The national debt per U.S. citizen rose sharply between 2004 and 2008   [#permalink] 19 Mar 2019, 02:45
Display posts from previous: Sort by