Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Aug 2710:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
We’ve worked incredibly hard to build TTP into the best test prep experience possible, and it would mean a lot to us to win Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep. If TTP has helped you, we’d be incredibly grateful for your vote.
Sep 0201:00 PM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Take 30% off all study plans with code COURSEWORK - Expires on Monday 9/7
Sep 0410:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
What does test anxiety really look like on the GMAT? For many test takers, it does not look like a panic attack. Instead, it shows up as brain fog, rereading, negative comparisons, mental noise....
Sep 0609:30 AM EDT
-12:30 PM EST
Top scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful EA course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Perfect class schedule and easy course access for working professionals. Class starts Sundays Sept. 6, 2026.- Sep 07
12:01 AM PDT
-11:59 PM PDT
On the 7th, GMAT Club Tests will be Free! Including all the Quizzes, Questions, and Tests. 12 AM - 11:59 PM PDT - Sep 09
07:00 AM PDT
-10:00 AM PDT
Meet AdComs and explore top Master’s programs - MiM, MiF, MSc, MSBA and more. - Application Fee Waivers - Free 1-Week of GMAT Club Tests: - Master's Application Toolkit - Grand Prize Giveaway 
Sep 1507:00 PM EDT
-09:00 PM EST
Elite scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thurs Sept. 15, 2026 - Nov. 15, 2027, 7:00pm-9:00pm EST
Sep 2108:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Boost your GMAT score in less than one month in a live online class + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Mon, Tues, Wed, Thur, Fri Sept. 21, 2026 - Oct. 9, 2027, 7:00pm-10:00pm EST
07 Jul 2026, 09:17
Kudos
Bookmarks
Given,
Soviet Union infrastructure spending:
24% of GDP in 1958
15% of GDP in 1980
Public works projects in Soviet
95000 in 1970
70000 in 1980
During period in which Soviet % declining
India increased Infra spenidng to 20 % of GDP
Argentina increased infra spending to 12% of GDP
Evaluation of choices:
A - No information about GDP size is given
B - Percentage is given, no info reagrding the amount/value of money
C - No corelation given
D - No prediction is given
E - Correct. Even after Soviet infra spending % is declining upto 15%, it is more than the % spending of Argentina (i.e. 12 %)
Answer : E
Soviet Union infrastructure spending:
24% of GDP in 1958
15% of GDP in 1980
Public works projects in Soviet
95000 in 1970
70000 in 1980
During period in which Soviet % declining
India increased Infra spenidng to 20 % of GDP
Argentina increased infra spending to 12% of GDP
Evaluation of choices:
A - No information about GDP size is given
B - Percentage is given, no info reagrding the amount/value of money
C - No corelation given
D - No prediction is given
E - Correct. Even after Soviet infra spending % is declining upto 15%, it is more than the % spending of Argentina (i.e. 12 %)
Answer : E
Bunuel
07 Jul 2026, 09:29
Kudos
Bookmarks
A) How big a nation's GDP is directly related to the number of public works projects the nation commissions.
do we know how big any of these countries' GDPs actually are? Nope. We only know percentages. Percentages don't tell you size at all 15% of a huge economy could be way more money than 90% of a tiny one. So this claim comes out of nowhere. Skip it.
B) Argentina and India spent more money on infrastructure in 1980 than did Soviet Union.
This one feels tempting at first glance, especially with India's 20%. But percentages aren't dollars. Without knowing the actual size of each country's GDP, we genuinely can't say who spent more money. It's like saying "she gave away a bigger percentage of her allowance than he did" that alone doesn't tell you who gave away more actual cash. So this one doesn't hold up
C) How much money a nation spends on infrastructure is directly related to the number of public works projects commissioned in that nation.
This is trying to link spending percentage to project count. But here's the catch we're never told how many projects India or Argentina commissioned We only got their spending percentages. You can't claim a relationship between two things when you only have information about one of them for these countries. Doesn't work.
D) Both India and Argentina will soon surpass Soviet Union in the number of public works projects commissioned.
This is predicting the future number of projects for India and Argentina. But again we have zero data on how many projects either of these countries commissions, now or ever. You can't predict something you have no starting numbers for. Not supported.
E) Between 1958 and 1980, Soviet Union consistently spent a larger percentage of its GDP on infrastructure than did Argentina.
Okay, let's actually check this one against the numbers. The passage tells us Soviet Union's percentage declined smoothly, without any weird jumps back up from 24% all the way down to its lowest point of 15% by 1980. Since it was steady and never dipped below 15% at any point in that stretch, we know Soviet Union was always at least 15% throughout that whole window.
Now compare that to Argentina, whose highest mentioned number is only 12% (reached by 1980). So even comparing Soviet Union's worst year (15%) to Argentina's best year (12%), Soviet Union still comes out ahead. This one actually checks out with everything we were told no outside assumptions needed.
So the answer is E
do we know how big any of these countries' GDPs actually are? Nope. We only know percentages. Percentages don't tell you size at all 15% of a huge economy could be way more money than 90% of a tiny one. So this claim comes out of nowhere. Skip it.
B) Argentina and India spent more money on infrastructure in 1980 than did Soviet Union.
This one feels tempting at first glance, especially with India's 20%. But percentages aren't dollars. Without knowing the actual size of each country's GDP, we genuinely can't say who spent more money. It's like saying "she gave away a bigger percentage of her allowance than he did" that alone doesn't tell you who gave away more actual cash. So this one doesn't hold up
C) How much money a nation spends on infrastructure is directly related to the number of public works projects commissioned in that nation.
This is trying to link spending percentage to project count. But here's the catch we're never told how many projects India or Argentina commissioned We only got their spending percentages. You can't claim a relationship between two things when you only have information about one of them for these countries. Doesn't work.
D) Both India and Argentina will soon surpass Soviet Union in the number of public works projects commissioned.
This is predicting the future number of projects for India and Argentina. But again we have zero data on how many projects either of these countries commissions, now or ever. You can't predict something you have no starting numbers for. Not supported.
E) Between 1958 and 1980, Soviet Union consistently spent a larger percentage of its GDP on infrastructure than did Argentina.
Okay, let's actually check this one against the numbers. The passage tells us Soviet Union's percentage declined smoothly, without any weird jumps back up from 24% all the way down to its lowest point of 15% by 1980. Since it was steady and never dipped below 15% at any point in that stretch, we know Soviet Union was always at least 15% throughout that whole window.
Now compare that to Argentina, whose highest mentioned number is only 12% (reached by 1980). So even comparing Soviet Union's worst year (15%) to Argentina's best year (12%), Soviet Union still comes out ahead. This one actually checks out with everything we were told no outside assumptions needed.
So the answer is E
07 Jul 2026, 09:32
Kudos
Bookmarks
SUG dropped no. of projects from 95000(1970) to 70000(1980). So the infra spends has declined.
Also, in 1958 spending on infra has peaked at 24% of GDP. and declined to 15 in 1980.
Similarly for India and argentina its 20% and 12% resp. So we can say india has been investing more and argentina less as compared to SUG.
Options:
A) big nation directly proportional to no. public works projects. This wouldn't be true in case of India. So Eliminate.
B) Argentina and India spends more money, as we can see argentina spends less as compare to Soviet. So eliminate.
C) Total money spends on infra is directly proportional to no. of projects commissioned. This couldn't be true coz cost of projects can differ. So Eliminate.
D) Both India and Argentina will surpass soviet in no of projects. This again can't be true coz cost of projects can differ. Eliminate.
E) Between 1985 and 1980, SUG consistently spent larger percentage of its GDP on infra. This is actually True and given. Since SUG has been spending 24%(1958) to 15% in 1980. Where as argentinas peaked at 12% in 1980. so it's always been lesser as compared to SUG.
So this is the answer. E.
Also, in 1958 spending on infra has peaked at 24% of GDP. and declined to 15 in 1980.
Similarly for India and argentina its 20% and 12% resp. So we can say india has been investing more and argentina less as compared to SUG.
Options:
A) big nation directly proportional to no. public works projects. This wouldn't be true in case of India. So Eliminate.
B) Argentina and India spends more money, as we can see argentina spends less as compare to Soviet. So eliminate.
C) Total money spends on infra is directly proportional to no. of projects commissioned. This couldn't be true coz cost of projects can differ. So Eliminate.
D) Both India and Argentina will surpass soviet in no of projects. This again can't be true coz cost of projects can differ. Eliminate.
E) Between 1985 and 1980, SUG consistently spent larger percentage of its GDP on infra. This is actually True and given. Since SUG has been spending 24%(1958) to 15% in 1980. Where as argentinas peaked at 12% in 1980. so it's always been lesser as compared to SUG.
So this is the answer. E.
Bunuel
