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

 It is currently 23 Sep 2019, 08:37

### 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 unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 06 Aug 2018
Posts: 98
Re: The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2019, 09:01

It comes straightway if population increases then we can reason it

Only option B states it in a very unique way !

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886

We have nothing to do with time.!!

(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881

It can be case that in some other cities rate is very much higher compared to that of these cities .

(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers

Again this is improper reasoning

Out of context

This is also.completely out of context

B wins

Posted from my mobile device
Manager
Joined: 30 May 2018
Posts: 154
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V36
GPA: 3.8
Re: The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2019, 09:05
A IMO

Here are my reasons for each option

The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886. It cannot, however, be properly concluded from these statistics that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881 because ________.

Clearly we need to come up with a reason to prove that the number of unemployed people in 1886 did not decrease from 1881.

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886
This looks good. This option says the average length of employment decreased in 1886. This signifies that people actually had a lot of temporary jobs in 1886 as compared in 1881, so it is possible that more people would have been unemployed when their temporary jobs were over.

(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886
Incorrect. If total available work force had decreases from 1881 to 1886, and unemployment rate also reduce to 7%, then the number of unemployed individuals should have dropped as well.

(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881
Irrelevant. We are looking at unemployment in the entire country, not geography specific.

(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers
Incorrect. Wages are irrelevant.

Incorrect. "help-wanted" ads could be anything, including volunteering jobs. Even if they are paid jobs, it shows 1886 had more jobs than 1881 so it actually weakens the argument.
Manager
Joined: 12 Mar 2019
Posts: 159
Re: The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2019, 09:07
IMO :B
only way that rate decreased and unemployment rate didn't is if population has increased either working or non working, or some can be non working.
Option B gives that idea that work force has increased
Manager
Joined: 24 Jun 2017
Posts: 71
Re: The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2019, 09:09
The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886. It cannot, however, be properly concluded from these statistics that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881 because ________.

Unemployment rate = no of people unemployed/ total number of people

Percent decreased yet number cannot be said to be low, why?

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886 - does not matter how many jobs they change.
(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886 Correct
(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881. Only number of certain states does not matter

(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers. Wages is out of scope

Posted from my mobile device
Manager
Joined: 17 Jan 2014
Posts: 54
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
WE: Supply Chain Management (Manufacturing)
Re: The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2019, 09:16
Correct Choice: A.

"Unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881" and it can not be concluded due to.

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886 [provide sufficient alternate reason to believe]
(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886 [info. not clear, with/without...]
(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881 [OFS]
(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers [talks about displacement from high band to lower band]
_________________
Thanks,
GS

Help me to help you || + Kudos = thank you dear !
Manager
Joined: 07 Dec 2018
Posts: 112
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Finance
GMAT 1: 670 Q49 V32
Re: The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2019, 09:16
The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886. It cannot, however, be properly concluded from these statistics that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881 because ________.

Workforce in 1881: 10,000
Unemployed in 1881 : 8% = 800
Employed in 1881 : 9,200

Workforce in 1886: 100,000
Unemployed in 1886 : 7% = 7000
Employed in 1881 : 93,000

Option (B) follows above logic. Rest are irrelevant. Hence, (B) is the correct answer.

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886
(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886
(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881
(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers
Manager
Joined: 30 Nov 2017
Posts: 192
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Re: The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2019, 09:24
The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886. It cannot, however, be properly concluded from these statistics that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881 because ________.

The stimulus says there is decrease in unemployment rate between 1881 to 1886, but it doesn't look conclusive from the statistics.

The right answer will tell us why the statistics may not be reliable.

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886 (This does not tell us why the statistics may not be reliable, it only says people working change job frequently - INCORRECT)
(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886 (This says that work force increased and does not give us any information that will help us on the statistics - INCORRECT)
(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881 (This is totally out of scope as it as nothing to do with the argument - INCORRECT)
(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers (This tells us that there is actually more unemployment - INCORRECT)
(E) help-wanted advertisements increased between 1881 and 1886 (This looks like it as it states that there are more help-wanted jobs. This means that a lot of unemployed people actually took helping job and that decreases the unemployment rate - CORRECT)

_________________
Be Braver, you cannot cross a chasm in two small jumps...
Manager
Joined: 24 Jun 2019
Posts: 108
Re: The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2019, 09:28
1
The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886. It cannot, however, be properly concluded from these statistics that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881 because ________.

ANALYSIS:
unemployemnt rate fell BUT cannot conclude that number decreased
Because_________
We have to give reason for 1st statement
If population increased and rate decreased, that would explain why we cannot conclude that number decreased

Options prefixed with X are discarded

X(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886
>>Average time per job would neither affect rate of unemployment nor number of people unemployed

(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886
>> THIS IS CORRECT. Since total workforce increased, the reduced 7% of bigger workforce may be higher than 8% of lower workforce. This would satisfactorily complete the sentence after because

X(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881
>>This only speaks abot rates of a component. No information about why numbers maynot be overall lower. High rates in 1 region do not explain uncertaininty in number of unemployed. We already know overall rate has reduced

X(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers
>>Reduction in high paying jobs does not mean reduction in number of unemployed people

>>increase in job postings does not mean change in number of emplyed people. Mabe number of available jobs increased.

Manager
Joined: 30 Aug 2018
Posts: 89
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Accounting
GPA: 3.36
WE: Consulting (Computer Software)
Re: The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2019, 09:31
(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886---not meaningful time is totally out of scope.
(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886---if total workforce increased number of unemployed also might increase but not decrease.
(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881---irrelevant always ignore options like these.
(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers--people got displaced therefore unemployment reduced and the number of unemployed people didnt increase
(E) help-wanted advertisements increased between 1881 and 1886----may be due to more stores.
Director
Status: Manager
Joined: 27 Oct 2018
Posts: 629
Location: Egypt
GPA: 3.67
WE: Pharmaceuticals (Health Care)
Re: The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2019, 09:31
It is more like a quant. DS question

assume that unemployed people are U, and employed people are E,
if U/(E+U) decreased, there are two options:
(1) U decreased --> number of unemployed people decreased ; or ;
(2) (U+E) increased --> which can happen by either an increase in U or an increase of E or by Both

By analyzing the choices:
(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886
Irrelevant!: it doesn't affect the statistics. Besides, employees may quit their jobs if their is an abundance of better jobs (which may weaken the author's argument)

(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886
Perfect!: the total available work force = (U+E), which if increased, opens several possibilities including that U may have increased along with E. --> so it validates the author's doubts

(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881
Out of scope: Rejected analogy as what happened in one state doesn't imply its repetition in other states.

(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers
Out of scope!: we are not discussing salaries at all.

Irrelevant!: the size of advertisement doesn't reflect the size demand or number of vacancies

B
_________________
Thanks for Kudos
Manager
Joined: 12 Jul 2017
Posts: 206
GMAT 1: 570 Q43 V26
GMAT 2: 660 Q48 V34
Re: The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2019, 09:33
Pre-Thought :
One of the crucial things before analysing this question is to understand what unemployement rate really means.
Unemployement rate is simply => ( # of people actively looking for jobs)/ # total people in the jobs

Now, when we say that this job pool is the workforce, then both Unemployed and employed people are part of SAME workforce.
That is why unemplpyement rate is :
#Un/#(Un+E)
where Un= Unemployed E = Employed.

Now the argument says that even if the Unemp rate DECREASED, doesn't mean that # of Un decreased. How this discrepancy could be looked into?
Well, mathematically speaking a ratio DECREASES when:
i) Numerator decreases and denominator remains relatively same
ii) Numerator relatively remain same and denominator increases.

So argument says that i) did not happen . Then ii) has to happen somehow right? Any option that says ii) DID happen, is our answer.

A. This option says that average time of STEADY JOBS dropped. But what about the variables Un and E. Do they relate to TIME in any case? No. ELIMINATE

B. CORRECT. Precisely what we came up with

C. Well, Other mid-western states have nothing to do here until and unless we draw some similarity of those states with Prelandia. If we say something like both had similar population and demography and their initial unemp rates were similar and much more. So this will not explain what argument demands. ELIMINATE

D. This option would actually WEAKEN the argument. If many workers are DISPLACED, then actually the workforce decreased. With denominator decreasing how do you explain the value of fraction becoming less? ONLY when numerator decreases as well. So this will give a NEGATIVE EFFECT to argument. ELIMINATE

E. Completely irrelevant because there are no linkages.

Regards,
Rishav
SVP
Joined: 03 Jun 2019
Posts: 1542
Location: India
The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2019, 09:46
The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886. It cannot, however, be properly concluded from these statistics that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881 because ________.

Unemployment rate = Number of unemployed people / Number of people in total available work force
If Unemployment rate has decreased but number of unemployed people has not decreased then it is possible that number of people in total labor force have increased.

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886Unemployment rate is unaffected by average time that employees stay in any one job. Incorrect

(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886
The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886. Therefore, it cannot, however, be properly concluded from these statistics that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881Correct

(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881
This is irrelevant and incorrect

(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers
This is unrelated to unemployment rate and number of people unemployed. Incorrect

This is irrelevant and incorrect

IMO B
_________________
"Success is not final; failure is not fatal: It is the courage to continue that counts."

Please provide kudos if you like my post. Kudos encourage active discussions.

My GMAT Resources: -

Efficient Learning
All you need to know about GMAT quant

Tele: +91-11-40396815
Mobile : +91-9910661622
E-mail : kinshook.chaturvedi@gmail.com
Manager
Joined: 06 Jun 2019
Posts: 118
Re: The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2019, 09:55
1
1881 – unemployment rate was 8%
1886 - unemployment rate was 7%

Conclusion: the number of unemployed people probably didn’t decrease between 1881 and 1886.
Reason: because_________

Whatever says the author as the reason, this information should clarify why 8% percent of a certain number is not greater than the 7% of another number (of unemployed people). Well, how can that indeed be true? We know that 7% of 200 is greater than the 8% of 100. We should probably look for a similar scenario in the answer choices.

A. The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886

This answer choice simply says that during this period people began to switch their jobs more frequently. For example, if before an average worker stayed in his job for 5 years, later this period declined to 2-3 years. However, that piece information doesn’t necessarily mean that he was jobless after 2-3 years, but may mean that he found a new more perspective job. Thus the frequency with which jobs were switched doesn’t enable to figure out the number of jobless people.

C. In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881

What does some mean? Some may mean only 2 or 3 states. If unemployment rate was much higher in only in 2 states, and in all the other states this rate was much lower than before or even zero, then the author might be wrong when he uses C as a reason. The decrease in other states may very well outnumber the increase of the unemployed people in those some states.

D. Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers.

The same situation as in A. Not the quantity but the quality of the employment is changing. D uses the word replaced. Replaced in turn means that jobs were not lost, but simply other people who work for less money came to the place of people who used to receive higher wages. Displacement doesn’t mean that jobs were lost, but means that workers had to find other jobs. If still not convinced that D is a wrong reason, then just pay attention that D talks only about high-paying industrial jobs, not about all kinds of jobs.

The most uncertain answer of all. Does such advertisement increased because unemployment increased? Maybe development in printing or radio or whatever mean of media was the reason? What if just the circulation of the magazines and journals with such advertisement increased? E can’t help the author to explain his conclusion.

B. The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886

The most awaited and needed reason is the increase in the number of workforce! As we have already said 7% of 200 is greater than the 8% of 100. B intentionally says that both employed and unemployed workforce increased. If only employed workforce had increased, then the number of unemployed people would not increase. Therefore, we want the number of unemployed workforce also to increase so that the author could explain why he can’t conclude that the unemployment decreased in 1886.

Hence B
_________________
Bruce Lee: “I fear not the man who has practiced 10,000 kicks once, but I fear the man who has practiced one kick 10,000 times.”
GMAC: “I fear not the aspirant who has practiced 10,000 questions, but I fear the aspirant who has learnt the most out of every single question.”
Manager
Joined: 30 May 2019
Posts: 108
Re: The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2019, 10:08
1
Let's break down the argument first. We know that unemployment rate was 8 percent in 1881. In 1886, unemployment already dropped to 7 percent. But, the argument warns, we should not conclude that number of unemployed dropped. At this point we need to find a reason why even tough percentage of unemployed dropped, number of people with no job did not. B does a great job here at explaining why. Let's set an example to illustrate.
Say in 1881, there were 100 people in workforce, consequently 8 people had no job.
Already in 1886, there were 1000 people in labor, and those without job were 70 or 7 percent.
As we see, even if percentage is lower, real number can be bigger. B says the same, more people were in workforce (and without job too, which directly draws needed conclusion).
Although we already found best choice, let's still look into other ones and prove them wrong

A. The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886 - If in 1886, a worker worked in one job for 10 years, in 1886 the figure declined to 7 years. But even if employee switched jobs more frequently, we are not given information about employment situation. This option just says that people got hired, quit jobs, got hired,........ more frequently that is it.

C. In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881 - key word here is "some". Some states can mean just five out of many. Even if unemployment there was higher, majority of other states cases can substantially change statistics, thus we are not concerned with '"some"

D. Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers. - Does not provide information about size of employment. This option just says that quality of workers changed. Before the country had more skilled jobs, now they are replaced with low-skilled jobs. But we do not care for this information.

E. help-wanted advertisements increased between 1881 and 1886 - we need lots of assumption for this one. It may be either that work force increased or that more people quit their jobs and thus firms search for new ones or that press became affordable and thus employees search for workers not through word of mouth but printed press or radio (if it was already developed by that time)

Now, we are certain to mark B as answer. Not only we found one correct answer but also four incorrect.
Intern
Joined: 07 Jun 2019
Posts: 16
Re: The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2019, 10:14
The correct answer is option B.
Percentage does not say about absolute number. A decrease in percentage does not necessarily means that the total number of unemployment has decreased.
Thus if the total number of work force has increased, it means the exact number of unemployment may have increased.
20% of 100 is 20
10% of 1000 is 100
Here the percentage has decreased but the absolute value has increased.

Senior Manager
Joined: 13 Feb 2018
Posts: 450
GMAT 1: 640 Q48 V28
Re: The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2019, 10:19
1
We know that the unemployment rate fell from 8 to 7 percent
if the number of population in 1981 was x, then the unemployed people is 0.08x
if the number of population in 1986 was y, then the unemployed people is 0.07y

Truly it depends on x and y which value above is more or even equal

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886
The average time employers stay on their jobs is quite irrelevant to find the reason why statistical data above is not enough to conclude what we are trying to conclude

(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886
I bet on this.
We know that the population increased (and does not remain the same) but we don't have the numbers
x=1000, unemployed people=0.08x=80
y=1100, unemployed people=0.07y=77 reduced
y=1200, unemployed people=0.07y=84 increased
That's why the author says that it cannot be properly concluded whether unemployed people increased, decreased or stayed the same

(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881
Thank you very much for providing some info about other states, but we dont care about it at this moment

(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers
Tells us about one aspect of the industry, but does not explain why we cant conclude increase/decrease of the number of unemployed people

help-wanted advertisements does not have a good correlation with unemployment rate or number, it's just a matter of habit: in 1981 most unemployed used such advertisements or only some

IMO
Ans: B
Manager
Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Posts: 110
Re: The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2019, 10:19
Answer should be B since the number of total workforce increased, unemployment percentage decreased
IMO B
Manager
Joined: 08 Jan 2018
Posts: 145
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, General Management
WE: Project Management (Manufacturing)
Re: The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2019, 10:23
1
IMO-B

Passage-
In Prelandia
Unemployment rate fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886.

Question concerned about comparison between the number of unemployed people in the two stated years.

Prethinking:
E- Employed Workforce
U- Unemployed Workforce
U+E- Total workforce

Unemployment rate= [ U / (U+E) ] *100

U= % Unemployment x (U+E)

Fall in unemployment rate can be because of U (Umemployed Workforce decrease) or U+E- (total Workforce increase) or combination of the two.

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886[b]--- Incorrect---[/b] This option tells about avg . stay in any job.. but no information about workforce. So this doesnt help ascertain anything about the unemployed.

(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886-- Correct------ If total workforce increased (U+E) between 1881 to 1886, then U+E(1881) < U+E(1886)

Now, U= % Unemployment x (U+E),
U (1881)= .08 (U+E- of 1881).......[(U+E- of 1881)- less compared to (U+E- of 1886)]
U(1886)=.07(U+E- of 1886)
We may not be able conclude from this , as Unemployed may be more or less in 1886 compared to 1881

(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881------ Incorrect----- We have to conclude on unemployed workforce that too in Prelandia. Mid-western industrial states are irrelevalent to discussion.

(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers------ Incorrect-----Incorrect----A/C this U+E(1881) > U+E(1886)
Therefore, .08 * U+E(1881) > 0.7* U+E(1886)
U(1881)>U(1886)
In this option, we are able to conclude. so this option wrong in accordance to question.

Manager
Joined: 15 Jun 2019
Posts: 170
The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2019, 10:49
The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886. It cannot, however, be properly concluded from these statistics that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881 because ________.

Type: Inference or missing information to conclusion. and fill in type
if we break it down : ___ -> unemployment rate decreased , but the actual number being decreased is not sure
missing information : how the number can be increased despite rate being decreased .
Goal: to find the missing information.
Analysis: so if rate decreased but number wont decrease if the proportion decreased but the actual increased. lets look for this along with others.

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886
even if average time in one job dropped it wont lead to unemployment. so this wont lead to our non conclusion. so wrong.

(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886
matching our analysis.unemployment rate is total unemployed / total workforce(employed + unemployed)
so if both increased but inproportion if total unemployed decreased then the rate will decrease. so the total unemployed actually increased. so the conclusion is number actually increased. hence as per the question we cannot conclude that it got lowered during then. BINGO WE GOT IT.

(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881
(higher in mid western wont decrease or increase in prelandia. hence wrong.)

(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers
even if pay varies, it is just a change of status in employed. no information of unemployed . or its rate. hence wrong

advertisement is irrelavant to actual employed or unemployed . so this is wrong.

hence ans is B
_________________
please do correct my mistakes that itself a big kudo for me,

thanks
Senior Manager
Status: eternal student
Joined: 06 Mar 2018
Posts: 290
Location: Kazakhstan
GPA: 3.87
Re: The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2019, 11:50
The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886. It cannot, however, be properly concluded from these statistics that The unemployment rate in Prelandia in 1881 was 8% because ________.

Let's get the meaning:
1. The unemployment rate in Prelandia in 1881 was 8%.
2. The unemployment rate in Prelandia in 1886 was 7%.
3. Taking into consideration this drop, one, however cannot say that The unemployment rate in Prelandia in 1881 was 8%
4. Because:
- In our own words, even if UR was drop to 1%, this has no direct relationship with the number of people who was without job and with job can vary dramatically, but in average rate can be the same, so we need to look for the answer that states something about number of people with or without job to complete this argument.

POE

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886
This information has no impact on UR, we don't need to know whether employees did overtime or not.

(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886
This is in line with our understanding of the passage, it completes sentence correctly with contrasting information needed.

(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881

(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers
Again, not related information, some type of jobs were replaced by other type of jobs, but this situation doesn't affect to the number of employees working and unemployment people

_________________
My SC approach flowchart

(no one is ideal, please correct if you see any mistakes or gaps in my explanation, it will be helpful for both of us, thank you)

___________________
"Nothing in this life is to be feared, it is only to be understood"
~ Marie Curie
Re: The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe   [#permalink] 19 Jul 2019, 11:50

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4    Next  [ 76 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by