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.
Sep 0208:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Video explanations + diagnosis of 10 weakest areas + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Sep 0301:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
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 0212:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
Thought your job leaves no time for GMAT prep? After multiple GMAT attempts and a demanding consulting job, Kshitij improved to 695 in under 2 months. Learn the mindset shifts, study strategy, and execution changes that made the breakthrough possible.
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, 10:33
Kudos
Bookmarks
The Soviet Union's infra spend as a % of GDP steadily declined from 24% (1958) to 15% (1980). During this period, the number of public works projects also fell (95K in 1970 to 70K in 1980).
By 1980, India increased its infra spend to 20% of its GDP on Infra, while Argentina had increased the infra spend to 12% of its GDP.
Which conclusion is best supported by info above:
Option A - Not Supported: The passage never provides the size of any country's GDP or discusses a relationship between GDP size and the number of projects.
B - Not Supported: The passage compares % of GDP, not absolute amounts. A country with a larger GDP can spend more money even with lower %
C - Not supported: The passage gives data for only one country (Soviet Union). A single example cannot establish a general relationship applicable to all nations.
D - Not Supported: This is a prediction about future and the passage does not provide any information about trends in the number of projects for India or Argentina
(Answer) E - Supported: Argentina spent 12% of its GDP in 1980, while the Soviet Union's % declined steadily from 24% to 15% over 1958-1980. Since 15% (its lowest point) is still greater than 12%, the Soviet Union consistently spent a larger % of GDP on Infra than Argentina throughout that period.
By 1980, India increased its infra spend to 20% of its GDP on Infra, while Argentina had increased the infra spend to 12% of its GDP.
Which conclusion is best supported by info above:
Option A - Not Supported: The passage never provides the size of any country's GDP or discusses a relationship between GDP size and the number of projects.
B - Not Supported: The passage compares % of GDP, not absolute amounts. A country with a larger GDP can spend more money even with lower %
C - Not supported: The passage gives data for only one country (Soviet Union). A single example cannot establish a general relationship applicable to all nations.
D - Not Supported: This is a prediction about future and the passage does not provide any information about trends in the number of projects for India or Argentina
(Answer) E - Supported: Argentina spent 12% of its GDP in 1980, while the Soviet Union's % declined steadily from 24% to 15% over 1958-1980. Since 15% (its lowest point) is still greater than 12%, the Soviet Union consistently spent a larger % of GDP on Infra than Argentina throughout that period.
07 Jul 2026, 10:36
Kudos
Bookmarks
My answer is E)
Question revolved around Numbers and Percentages
Information from stem-
Soviet Union- Number of projects declined by 25000 in 1980, Infra spending declined from 24% to 15% of GDP in 1980. It is important to note we don't know GDP figure hence we cannot decide if spending decreased or increased, because if GDP increased significantly then even if GDP spending remains same it forms lower proportion of increased GDP.
India and Argentina- Infra spending increased to 20% and 12% of GDP, again we don't know GDP figure hence cannot conclude if spending has increased or decreased.
For conclusion we need an answer which must be true based on stimulus info, outside info is not allowed.
Options-
A) GDP is not given hence we cannot compare it's size- Can be true / Out of scope
B) Again as mentioned above we cannot find sum spent as we don't know GDP figure- Can be true / Out of scope
C) Similar to A we don't know GDP figure and consequently amount spent- Can be true / Out of scope
D) Number of projects for India and Argentina are not given hence we cannot compare- Can be true / Out of scope
E) Correct- We can see percentage of GDP spent on Infra by Soviet Union (15%) is more than Argentina's percentage (12%)- Must be true
Question revolved around Numbers and Percentages
Information from stem-
Soviet Union- Number of projects declined by 25000 in 1980, Infra spending declined from 24% to 15% of GDP in 1980. It is important to note we don't know GDP figure hence we cannot decide if spending decreased or increased, because if GDP increased significantly then even if GDP spending remains same it forms lower proportion of increased GDP.
India and Argentina- Infra spending increased to 20% and 12% of GDP, again we don't know GDP figure hence cannot conclude if spending has increased or decreased.
For conclusion we need an answer which must be true based on stimulus info, outside info is not allowed.
Options-
A) GDP is not given hence we cannot compare it's size- Can be true / Out of scope
B) Again as mentioned above we cannot find sum spent as we don't know GDP figure- Can be true / Out of scope
C) Similar to A we don't know GDP figure and consequently amount spent- Can be true / Out of scope
D) Number of projects for India and Argentina are not given hence we cannot compare- Can be true / Out of scope
E) Correct- We can see percentage of GDP spent on Infra by Soviet Union (15%) is more than Argentina's percentage (12%)- Must be true
Bunuel
07 Jul 2026, 10:36
Kudos
Bookmarks
Answer is E.
As per argument, Soviet Union's % "steadily declined" from its peak of 24% in 1958 down to 15% in 1980. This mean, the Soviet Union's spending was >=15% till 1980. Meanwhile, Argentina increased its spending upto 12% by 1980. Therefore, Soviet Union must have spent a larger % throughout the entire period of 1950 to 1980.
As per argument, Soviet Union's % "steadily declined" from its peak of 24% in 1958 down to 15% in 1980. This mean, the Soviet Union's spending was >=15% till 1980. Meanwhile, Argentina increased its spending upto 12% by 1980. Therefore, Soviet Union must have spent a larger % throughout the entire period of 1950 to 1980.
Bunuel
