Last visit was: 18 Nov 2025, 23:09

It is currently 18 Nov 2025, 23:09

Toolkit

Practice Tests

Verbal Archive [Locked]

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

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Nov 18
GMAT Quiz #50 - Live GMAT Practice Covering Quant, Verbal, RC, & Data Insights
11:00 AM PST
-
12:00 PM PST
Join us in a live GMAT practice session and solve 30 challenging GMAT questions with other test takers in timed conditions, covering GMAT Quant, Data Sufficiency, Data Insights, Reading Comprehension, and Critical Reasoning questions.
Nov 22
GMAT RC Masterclass
11:00 AM IST
-
01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment
Nov 23
Conquer Algebra on the GMAT Focus Edition
11:00 AM IST
-
01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease.
Nov 25
Try OnDemand GMAT Masterclass
10:00 AM EST
-
11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.

Back to Forum

Create Topic

This thread will be used to collect tips and tricks for CR.

1 2

briozeal

Joined: 10 Oct 2005

Last visit: 23 Aug 2007

Posts: 34

Own Kudos:

Posts: 34

Kudos: 14

28 Jun 2006, 15:12

Kudos

Bookmarks

HongHu

Assumption is something you need for you to draw your conclusion. Inference is a judgement that you draw from existing facts.

Another explanation : Assumption is a bridge between evidence and conclusion. It supports the conclusion.

Where as inference can be drawn out from the facts and the passage supports the inference.

zoom612

Joined: 07 Mar 2006

Last visit: 31 Jan 2012

Posts: 163

Own Kudos:

253

Given Kudos: 1

Posts: 163

Kudos: 253

28 Jun 2006, 21:12

Kudos

Bookmarks

Can someone explain what an argument is?

GMATBUFF

Joined: 28 Jun 2006

Last visit: 28 Jun 2006

Posts: 1

Kudos: 0

28 Jun 2006, 23:03

Kudos

Bookmarks

Option D has a flaw in it.
What do we mean by "significant number" of retirees moving to another state?

Lets say, initially there were 1000 retirees out of which 10%, ie. 100 retirees have moved to Florida and 900 others to another state.

Now, if there are 1300 retirees, out of which 7% (decrease by 3 percentage points) , ie. 91 have moved to Florida and 1201 to rest of the US.

From 900 to 1201 we see a significant increase in the retirees moving to rest of the US. ( Will significant increase mean only doubling or more than that?) At the same time, Florida has lesser number of retirees than it has before.

So, How can option D weaken the statement?

Pls help me with the right option.

tennis1ball

Joined: 25 Jun 2006

Last visit: 18 Mar 2008

Posts: 650

Own Kudos:

996

Posts: 650

Kudos: 996

20 Sep 2006, 22:45

Kudos

Bookmarks

You can always argue about the significance of "significant"; Compare C with D, however, you can see that D is more related to the argument in the fashion of evidence-conclusion.

Thus D is correct here. C also weakens it, but it drifts further from the logic of the argument than D does.

Artemov

Joined: 09 Oct 2006

Last visit: 08 Aug 2025

Posts: 86

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 2

Status:Post MBA, working in the area of Development Finance

Location: Africa

Posts: 86

Kudos: 8

20 Oct 2006, 00:59

Kudos

Bookmarks

ATLiens073

Answer is D

A is wrong because they are talking Florida has more number of people coming in than any other state.. this matter is irrelevant since we are talking about the percentage drop in the number of people coming to florida. Note, you can still have a percentage drop in population coming into florida and still have a greater number of people coming into Florida than any other state. So A does not weaken the argument as much as D.

I completely agree. The only logical statement weakening the argument is D.

Andr359

Joined: 24 Nov 2006

Last visit: 29 Aug 2007

Posts: 169

Own Kudos:

Posts: 169

Kudos: 65

29 Nov 2006, 21:32

Kudos

Bookmarks

I agree w/ D. It indeed says that the total number of people who move to other states when they retire is larger, so even if from a % point of view, such number has decreased for Florida, in absolute numbers it has increased.

Amit05

Joined: 09 Aug 2006

Last visit: 09 Jan 2015

Posts: 283

Own Kudos:

527

Posts: 283

Kudos: 527

13 Apr 2007, 21:05

Kudos

Bookmarks

Taku

Like Prema, I thought (A) is the right answer, but see (D) is the best one.

However, can somebody help me to better understand why A is not correct? Is A a wrong anser, or just not better than (D)?

I see some explanation adding "over past ten years", but don't really find a reason to justify A is not correct. Thank you.

Though I am late in my explanation, I will nevertheless answer.

A says " Florida attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state" Which implies that out of total number of people who retire and move to another state , Florida has larger share. This in no way is clear what is the proportion of those retirees coming to Florida. hence A is not sufficient. I think this is one of the greater traps.
D is the correct answer. Because if the total number of retirees has increased significantly, then the 3% figure does not mean the number of retirees in Florida is reduced and hence there is no loss to Local businesses. Hence D weakens the statement properly.

Thanks.

rakesh.id

Joined: 27 Feb 2007

Last visit: 13 Nov 2012

Posts: 35

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 1

Posts: 35

Kudos: 41

15 Apr 2007, 00:35

Kudos

Bookmarks

Yes D is clearly the right answer.

There is another percentage-based CR from OG 11 that has me confused. It is the sample question # 81 on page 491 of OG 11. The explanation provided is not quite clear and convincing to me.

Does anyone care to discuss this question?

dwivedys

Joined: 15 Jul 2004

Last visit: 02 Sep 2018

Posts: 597

Own Kudos:

750

Given Kudos: 17

Concentration: Strategy

Schools:Wharton (R2 - submitted); HBS (R2 - submitted); IIMA (admitted for 1 year PGPX)

Posts: 597

Kudos: 750

15 Apr 2007, 09:48

Kudos

Bookmarks

rakesh.id

Though the OG problem deals with % it's not in the same league as the problem being discussed in this thread - The percentage trap is applicable where fluctuations in percentages are used as a decoy to hide real facts - for ex while the percentage of retirees to florida dropped the ABSOLUTE NUMBER of retirees actually went up; eventually, so long as the absolute number keeps increasing - the business profitability would not take a hit.

Returning to the OG example - the percentages are used to show that radar equipped cars though a minority vis-a-vis non-radar equipped cars constitute a significantly higher percentage of ticketed cars - this makes the author conclude that drivers of radar equipped cars are likely to exceed the speed limit regularly... how can this be concluded UNLESS we assume that those who are ticketed once are more likely to be ticketed again - which is stated in B and hence the correct answer.

rakesh.id

Joined: 27 Feb 2007

Last visit: 13 Nov 2012

Posts: 35

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 1

Posts: 35

Kudos: 41

15 Apr 2007, 11:11

Kudos

Bookmarks

Thanks for clarifying, dwivedy!

rakesh.id

Joined: 27 Feb 2007

Last visit: 13 Nov 2012

Posts: 35

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 1

Posts: 35

Kudos: 41

15 Apr 2007, 11:12

Kudos

Bookmarks

Thanks for clarifying, dwivedy!

javed

Joined: 01 Jan 2007

Last visit: 13 Sep 2007

Posts: 177

Own Kudos:

352

Posts: 177

Kudos: 352

17 Apr 2007, 06:38

Kudos

Bookmarks

Keep up the good work

Javed.

Cheers!

surbab

Joined: 20 Nov 2006

Last visit: 09 Dec 2008

Posts: 112

Own Kudos:

328

Posts: 112

Kudos: 328

20 Apr 2007, 22:40

Kudos

Bookmarks

This is really a good post giving good insight into CR strategies...

hemanth.m1

Joined: 04 Jun 2007

Last visit: 06 Jun 2007

Posts: 1

Kudos: 0

04 Jun 2007, 06:01

Kudos

Bookmarks

jksingh21

In my opion C is not correct due to following reason:

C. There are far more local businesses in Florida that cater to tourists than there are local businesses that cater to retirees.

This statement does not weaken or strengthen author's claim of impact on "local businesses in Florida cater to retirees" and hence not an option.

Even though there are less businesses that cater to retirees (than tourists), it does not mean that they will not feel the impact if there were less ritirees settling in Florida.

Correct me if I am wrong.

Cheers!

option "c" is not correct since they say there are more business catering to tourists but not stating whether the no of tourists has increased or not..

option "a" is not correct since it just states that Florida "attracts" more retirees but the question says the the no has decreased..!!

Cheers,
Hem

chica

Joined: 19 Dec 2007

Last visit: 19 Jun 2009

Posts: 39

Own Kudos:

Posts: 39

Kudos: 87

22 Dec 2007, 05:37

Kudos

Bookmarks

du_bill

If A says something like below, it could seriously weaken the argument. Otherwise, the negative effect may still be there...

A. Florida attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state over past ten years.

Hi, I have recently joined. Hope this will help some:

Answer choice "C" merely changes the premises to the conclusion, the evidence the conclusion is based on. It is complete contradiction, which is wrong in its nature.

Answer choice "A" - it is great that Florida attracts more retired people than any other state does. But suppose that during the last ten years less people have retired at all in the whole country or simply less of the retired have moved anywhere. It means that retired people in Florida despite that it attracts those more than any other state does will be less now... and local companies indeed will be effected.

GMATBLACKBELT

Joined: 29 Mar 2007

Last visit: 03 Jun 2013

Posts: 1,139

Own Kudos:

1,878

Posts: 1,139

Kudos: 1,878

22 Dec 2007, 10:49

Kudos

Bookmarks

jpv

This thread will be used to collect tips and tricks for CR. Please feel free to discuss and add.

-Hong

Percentage Trap

I would like to add Percentage Trap to this llist. It can be best explained with this example:

In the United States, of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired, the percentage who retired to Florida has decreased by 3 percentage points over the past ten years. Since many local businesses in Florida cater to retirees, this decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Florida attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state.
B. The number of people who move out of Florida to accept employment in other states has increased over the past ten years.
C. There are far more local businesses in Florida that cater to tourists than there are local businesses that cater to retirees.
D. The total number of people who retired and moved to another state for their retirement has increased significantly over the past ten years.
E. The number of people who left Florida when they retired to live in another state was greater last year than it was ten years ago.

Anand's explaination:
Guys this is a beauty. Please hammer this into your head. This is a standard percentage trap. Let me elaborate.

Assume that last year 1000 people in the US moved out of state to retire.
Of this say 10% moved to florida = 100 people
So 90% moved to states other than florida right?

This year 20000 people moved to other state to retire
Of this say 8% moved to florida = 160 people.
So 92% moved to states other than florida right?

Though the %of people moving to florida has decreased (because %of people moving to otherstates has increased) number of people moving to florida has infact increased from 100 to 160. So the local businesses are gonna do great.

The bold portion is what (D) says and thus weakens the argument more seriously than (C).

D. Also notice that C does not weaken the argument... it actually shifts the arguments focus just a bit.

C doesnt explain why "Since many local businesses in Florida cater to retirees" these local businesses that cater to retires will not suffer. Just b/c other businesses wont doesnt mean that these businesses wont as well. C warps the argument. If you saw this you could still use the numbers approach, which is still helpful, or successfully POE to D.

bforbala

Joined: 06 May 2008

Last visit: 20 Jan 2014

Posts: 10

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 14

Concentration: Strategy, General Management

Schools: McDonough '16 Smith '16 Boston U '16 McCombs '16 Goizueta '16 Tepper '16 Smeal '16 W.P. Carey '16 Foster '16 (A) Georgia Tech '16 Mays '16 Carlson '16

Posts: 10

Kudos: 3

09 Jun 2008, 04:25

Kudos

Bookmarks

Situation : # of retirees moving into Florida has been decreased in the last 10 years and this might potentially have -ve impact on local business's economy.

A. Florida attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state.
>>> We have no idea about Florida's comparison to other States. So, drop this !
B. The number of people who move out of Florida to accept employment in other states has increased over the past ten years.
>>> This agrees with the argument (people moving out of jobs in Florida in the past 10 yrs). So, drop this !
C. There are far more local businesses in Florida that cater to tourists than there are local businesses that cater to retirees.
>> If this is true, decreasing # of retirees settling in Florida will not impact the economy of local businesses. So, this might weaken the argument => Answer !
D. The total number of people who retired and moved to another state for their retirement has increased significantly over the past ten years.
>> This contradicts the fact mentioned in the statement. Rather total # of people who retired and moved to another state HAS DECREASED.

E. The number of people who left Florida when they retired to live in another state was greater last year than it was ten years ago.
>> No idea or data about # of retired migrants of last year and its comparison to 10 years back. Drop this !

VerbalBot

Non-Human User

Joined: 01 Oct 2013

Last visit: 04 Jan 2021

Posts: 18,836

Own Kudos:

986

Posts: 18,836

Kudos: 986

10 Mar 2021, 07:40

Kudos

Bookmarks

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Archived Topic

Hi there,

This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.

Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Verbal Questions Forum

Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.

Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!