International Policy Adviser: People over the age of 65 are

Question

International Policy Adviser: People over the age of 65 are underrepresented in the government of Country X. Because the government sets the country's policy priorities and passes new laws, the underrepresentation of people over the age of 65 results in a significant lack of consideration for issues important to this age group, such as pensions, age-related welfare, and employment discrimination; only an increase in the number of government officials will solve the problem.

Which of the following best describes an assumption implicit to the international policy adviser's argument?

Which of the following best describes an assumption implicit to the international policy adviser's argument?

(A) A significant increase in the size of Country X's government would be required in order to increase the representation of people over the age of 65 in the government.
(B) A significant increase in the representation of people over the age of 65 in Country X's government would result in an increase in the consideration for issues affecting people in this age group.
(C) A significant increase in funding toward educating the government about issues affecting people over age 65 would result in more serious consideration for issues affecting people in this age group.
(D) A significant increase in funding for adult education targeted to people over age 65 would result in an increase in the number of such people in Country X's government.
(E) A significant increase in the representation of people over the age of 65 in Country X's government would have to precede any increase in the number of high-ranking government officials who are over the age of 65.

sayantanc2k · Accepted Answer

Premise: X (underrepresentation) causes Y (lack in consideration). This statement is not same as saying removal of X will result in Y not happening. (there could be other factors whose presence or absence may still be causing Y, even after removal of the cause X).

Hence the statement that removal of X will result in Y not happening must be explicitly assumed in order to arrive at the conclusion.

nverma · Answer

International Policy Adviser: People over the age of 65 are underrepresented in the government of Country X. Because the government sets the country's policy priorities and passes new laws, the underrepresentation of people over the age of 65 results in a significant lack of consideration for issues important to this age group, such as pensions, age-related welfare, and employment discrimination; only an increase in the number of government officials will solve the problem.

Which of the following best describes an assumption implicit to the international policy adviser's argument?

Which of the following best describes an assumption implicit to the international policy adviser's argument?

(A) A significant increase in the size of Country X's government would be required in order to increase the representation of people over the age of 65 in the government. >>> Let say there are 4 people over the age of 65 in a government of 9 officials, we need to have only 1 person to overcome under representation>> So a significant increase is not necessary.

(B) A significant increase in the representation of people over the age of 65 in Country X's government would result in an increase in the consideration for issues affecting people in this age group.  >>> Negate this assertion and the argument falls apart. Negation :A significant increase in the representation of people over the age of 65 in Country X's government would NOT result in an increase in the consideration for issues affecting people in this age group

(C) A significant increase in funding toward educating the government about issues affecting people over age 65 would result in more serious consideration for issues affecting people in this age group. >>> Not mentioned >> Out of scope

(D) A significant increase in funding for adult education targeted to people over age 65 would result in an increase in the number of such people in Country X's government. >>> Not mentioned >> Out of scope

(E) A significant increase in the representation of people over the age of 65 in Country X's government would have to precede any increase in the number of high-ranking government officials who are over the age of 65.  >>> Not mentioned >> Out of scope.

ramana · Answer

Straight B.

when you negate B, argument is weakened.

Senthil1981 · Answer

Answer is (B) A significant increase in the representation of people over the age of 65 in Country X's government would result in an increase in the consideration for issues affecting people in this age group.

Since people over the age of 65 are underrepresented in the government, their issues are not resolved. So only C provides option to resolve this.

manhasnoname · Answer

Isn't B already stated in the question stem?

"the underrepresentation of people over the age of 65 results in a significant lack of consideration for issues important to this age group"

How can it be the assumption? Isn't assumption an unstated evidence?

Please help!!!

shivakmr · Answer

Premise : significant underrepresented population aged over 65 leading to lack of considering issues faced by them.
Conclusion: increase in number of government officials will solve the problem.
Assumption:increase in representation leads to consideration of the issues faced by them (solution)

aaba · Answer

since the source is not clear, but the question has been bookmarked many times, I think the question is correct.
(A) A significant increase in the size of Country X's government would be required in order to increase the representation of people over the age of 65 in the government. -> A only concerns the requirement of the increase of the representation.
(B) A significant increase in the representation of people over the age of 65 in Country X's government would result in an increase in the consideration for issues affecting people in this age group. -> causal effect and relationship
(C) A significant increase in  funding toward educating the government  about issues affecting people over age 65 would result in more serious consideration for issues affecting people in this age group.
(D) A significant increase in  funding for adult education  targeted to people over age 65 would result in an increase in the number of such people in Country X's government.
(E) A significant increase in the representation of people over the age of 65 in Country X's government would  have to precede any increase in the number of high-ranking government officials  who are over the age of 65.

Sateni7628 · Answer

Premise: There are less number of people in the government of country X who are over the age of 65. This causes significant lack of consideration for issues important to this age group

Conclusion: Only an increase in the number of government officials will solve the problem.

Looking to fill the bridge between premise and conclusion, one can assume that increase in number of people over age 65 in the government would actually result in increase in the consideration of issues for this age group. Otherwise the conclusion, falls apart. Hence choice B is right.

amangupta96 · Answer

IMO B.

Premise : People over 65 are underrepresented in government because of which government doesn't prioritise the problem faced by the people of this age group while making new laws and policies.
Conclusion : Increase in government officials will solve this problem.
To strengthen the conclusion we need an answer which says there should be an increase in government officials for 65 above age which would increase the representation of this age group within government and hence would prioritise the problem faced by people of this age group. Only B supports this and hence is the answer.

Crytiocanalyst · Answer

(A) A significant increase in the size of Country X's government would be required in order to increase the representation of people over the age of 65 in the government.
Change in the composition might also help rather than increasing the size

(B) A significant increase in the representation of people over the age of 65 in Country X's government would result in an increase in the consideration for issues affecting people in this age group.
This is a valid assumption therefore let us hang on to it

(C) A significant increase in funding toward educating the government about issues affecting people over age 65 would result in more serious consideration for issues affecting people in this age group.
how the funding affects is thoroughly out of context doesn't impact the passage

(D) A significant increase in funding for adult education targeted to people over age 65 would result in an increase in the number of such people in Country X's government.
Similar reasoning as C

(E) A significant increase in the representation of people over the age of 65 in Country X's government would have to precede any increase in the number of high-ranking government officials who are over the age of 65.
Any level increase in representation is fine it need not be high ranking therefore out

Theref/ore IMO B

vaibhav_bisht · Answer

why Option E is not answer as i know conclusion is increase the goverment offical will resolve the problem the that are been neglected by lack of representation. I found a logical gap. the conclusion not talking about increasing the represantative over 65 age but saying increase govt. official will decrease the lack on consideration of the topic that matter most 
because my option choice is B first

guddo · Answer

International Policy Adviser: People over the age of 65 are underrepresented in the government of Country X. Because the government sets the country's policy priorities and passes new laws, the underrepresentation of people over the age of 65 results in a significant lack of consideration for issues important to this age group, such as pensions, age-related welfare, and employment discrimination; only an increase in the number of government officials will solve the problem.
 
 Which of the following best describes an assumption implicit to the international policy adviser's argument?

The adviser argues that people over 65 are underrepresented in government, and that this causes too little attention to issues important to them. So the argument assumes that increasing their representation in government would actually lead to more attention to those issues.  The missing link  is between representation and  policy consideration .

(A) A significant increase in the size of Country X's government would be required in order to increase the representation of people over the age of 65 in the government.

Wrong. The argument requires increasing the number of officials over 65, not necessarily increasing the total size of the government.

(B) A significant increase in the representation of people over the age of 65 in Country X's government would result in an increase in the consideration for issues affecting people in this age group.

Correct. This directly connects the proposed solution to the problem. If more officials over 65 would not lead to more consideration of issues affecting that group, then the adviser’s argument would fail.

(C) A significant increase in funding toward educating the government about issues affecting people over age 65 would result in more serious consideration for issues affecting people in this age group.

Wrong. This suggests another possible solution, but the adviser’s argument does not depend on whether education funding would help.

(D) A significant increase in funding for adult education targeted to people over age 65 would result in an increase in the number of such people in Country X's government.

Wrong. This is about how to increase representation, not whether increased representation would solve the stated problem.

(E) A significant increase in the representation of people over the age of 65 in Country X's government would have to precede any increase in the number of high-ranking government officials who are over the age of 65.

Wrong. The argument is about overall representation and attention to age-related issues, not specifically high-ranking officials.

Answer: (B)

guddo · Answer

E is not needed because it talks about  high-ranking officials  and timing.

The argument’s problem is lack of consideration for issues affecting people over 65. To fix that, the argument must assume that increasing representation of people over 65 would lead to more attention to those issues.

That is exactly B.

E says representation must come before an increase in high-ranking officials over 65. But the argument never says high-ranking officials are required, and it never depends on that order. So E does not fill the  main logical gap .

International Policy Adviser: People over the age of 65 are

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

International Policy Adviser: People over the age of 65 are

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards