Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 04:18 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 04:18
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
Close
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
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2 
805+ Level|   Conclusion|   Inference|      
User avatar
MartyTargetTestPrep
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Last visit: 11 Aug 2023
Posts: 3,476
Own Kudos:
5,579
 [1]
Given Kudos: 1,430
Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 3,476
Kudos: 5,579
 [1]
When a city experiences a sharp decline in population, the city's tax 19 Apr 2021, 04:18
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
gamebredfighter
The tax revenues decrease when population decreases. Since the revenues cannot be recovered by raising tax rate (since it will mean more people leaving and consequently lower collection points), it means the revenue will reduce. The need for the revenue does not reduce for at least some services. Hence, some services will certainly suffer. If police protection and water line maintenance do not suffer, something will suffer.
This follows what is given to us in the argument. There is nothing called "this option is incorrect due to usage of extreme language". If the premises give you extreme data, the option will use extreme language.
If the premises give you: "If A happens, B will happen." and "A has happened", what will you conclude? That B WILL HAPPEN. Can you say that the language is too extreme here? No.

Why do we have to assume though that the city isn't already making much more revenue than it needs to have all its services on point even though the tax revenue decreased?
Show more
This is not an Inference question, that answer to which "must be true" given the information presented. This is a Conclusion question. So, we are simply looking for a conclusion that follows from the information.

Furthermore, this is not a conclusion about a particular city. It's a conclusion about what happens in general under certain circumstances.

So, (A) is a reasonable answer.

That said, your point has some merit The passage only implies rather indirectly rather than states as fact that, in the scenario mentioned, the city does not start off with revenue much greater than costs.
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,989
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,989
When a city experiences a sharp decline in population, the city's tax 20 Apr 2021, 03:22
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
gamebredfighter
VeritasKarishma
Vineetk
When a city experiences a sharp decline in population, the city's tax revenues, which pay for such city services as police protection and maintenance of water lines, also decrease. The area to be policed and the number and length of the water lines to be maintained, however, do not decrease. Attempting to make up the tax revenue lost by raising tax rates is not feasible, since higher tax rates would cause even more residents to leave.

The information given most strongly supports which of the following general claims?

A. If, in a city with sharply declining population, police protection and water line maintenance do not deteriorate, some other service previously provided by the city will deteriorate or be eliminated.

B. If a city's tax rates are held stable over a period of time, neither the population nor the levels of city services provided will tend to decline over that period.

C. If a city's population declines sharply, police protection and water line maintenance are the services that deteriorate most immediately and most markedly.

D. A city that suffers revenue losses because of a sharp decline in population can make up some of the lost tax revenue by raising tax rates, provided the city's tax rates are low in relation to those of other cities.

E. A city that is losing residents because tax rates are perceived as too high by those residents can reverse this population trend by bringing its tax rates down to a more moderate level.

Premises:
Sharp decline in population causes tax revenue to reduce.
But the areas which this revenue supports is still the same such as police protection and maintenance of water lines.
We cannot make up by increasing tax rate since more people will leave.

We need a conclusion. Something that follows from what is given. There should be no new information.

A. If, in a city with sharply declining population, police protection and water line maintenance do not deteriorate, some other service previously provided by the city will deteriorate or be eliminated.
The tax revenues decrease when population decreases. Since the revenues cannot be recovered by raising tax rate (since it will mean more people leaving and consequently lower collection points), it means the revenue will reduce. The need for the revenue does not reduce for at least some services. Hence, some services will certainly suffer. If police protection and water line maintenance do not suffer, something will suffer.
This follows what is given to us in the argument. There is nothing called "this option is incorrect due to usage of extreme language". If the premises give you extreme data, the option will use extreme language.
If the premises give you: "If A happens, B will happen." and "A has happened", what will you conclude? That B WILL HAPPEN. Can you say that the language is too extreme here? No.

B. If a city's tax rates are held stable over a period of time, neither the population nor the levels of city services provided will tend to decline over that period.
We do not know what causes the population to decline. Irrelevant.

C. If a city's population declines sharply, police protection and water line maintenance are the services that deteriorate most immediately and most markedly.
Not known. When the revenue declines, which services take the hit, we don't know. All we can say is that some service will take a hit.

D. A city that suffers revenue losses because of a sharp decline in population can make up some of the lost tax revenue by raising tax rates, provided the city's tax rates are low in relation to those of other cities.
What happens when the city increases tax rate, we cannot say. The premises give us that we cannot make up for lost revenue by increasing tax rate. Are we able to make up for it partially provided the tax rate still remains low, we cannot say. Note that we have no information on why people choose a certain city to live in. Perhaps its tax rate is lower but the quality of air and water isn't that great. Perhaps its cost of living is high. What happens when the tax rate is increased slightly (but is still less than other cities), overall it may not make financial sense for people to stay. The point is, we don't know how people will react if the taxes are raised even a tiny bit. We do know that raising tax rates cannot make up the loss in revenue and that is all. The argument tells us nothing else. We have to stick to the universe created by our argument.

E. A city that is losing residents because tax rates are perceived as too high by those residents can reverse this population trend by bringing its tax rates down to a more moderate level.
Irrelevant. We don't know how to reverse population trend and whether it can be reversed in the first place.

Answer (A)


A. If, in a city with sharply declining population, police protection and water line maintenance do not deteriorate, some other service previously provided by the city will deteriorate or be eliminated.
The tax revenues decrease when population decreases. Since the revenues cannot be recovered by raising tax rate (since it will mean more people leaving and consequently lower collection points), it means the revenue will reduce. The need for the revenue does not reduce for at least some services. Hence, some services will certainly suffer. If police protection and water line maintenance do not suffer, something will suffer.
This follows what is given to us in the argument. There is nothing called "this option is incorrect due to usage of extreme language". If the premises give you extreme data, the option will use extreme language.
If the premises give you: "If A happens, B will happen." and "A has happened", what will you conclude? That B WILL HAPPEN. Can you say that the language is too extreme here? No.

Why do we have to assume though that the city isn't already making much more revenue than it needs to have all its services on point even though the tax revenue decreased?
VeritasKarishma
MartyTargetTestPrep
GMATNinja
Show more

We are looking for a "general" claim. It may not be valid for a city with certain special circumstances. The argument tells us that revenue cannot be made up. So it means something will suffer. Normally, you wouldn't expect the city to collect far more revenue than what it needs to run the services.
User avatar
custodio
User avatar
Joined: 25 Jun 2018
Last visit: 03 Feb 2023
Posts: 39
Own Kudos:
10
Given Kudos: 46
Posts: 39
Kudos: 10
When a city experiences a sharp decline in population, the city's tax 19 Apr 2022, 08:59
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB

To eliminate (B) and (D), we say that "we do not know how/why people leave".

Similar logic can be applied to choice (A):
If, in a city with sharply declining population, police protection and water line maintenance do not deteriorate, some other service previously provided by the city will deteriorate or be eliminated.
-> "we do not know how the city would take action".

For example, I can easily conclude that city does not HAVE TO eliminate/deteriorate some other services (if police protection and water line maintenance services stay same). The city can:
- take a loan from the bank
- sell some stuff in the city
- (other ways besides cutting city's services) etc.
to make up for the revenue lost.

I guess sometimes we just need to choose a relatively better option and move on.
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,989
 [2]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,989
 [2]
When a city experiences a sharp decline in population, the city's tax 20 Apr 2022, 23:18
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
custodio
KarishmaB

To eliminate (B) and (D), we say that "we do not know how/why people leave".

Similar logic can be applied to choice (A):
If, in a city with sharply declining population, police protection and water line maintenance do not deteriorate, some other service previously provided by the city will deteriorate or be eliminated.
-> "we do not know how the city would take action".

For example, I can easily conclude that city does not HAVE TO eliminate/deteriorate some other services (if police protection and water line maintenance services stay same). The city can:
- take a loan from the bank
- sell some stuff in the city
- (other ways besides cutting city's services) etc.
to make up for the revenue lost.

I guess sometimes we just need to choose a relatively better option and move on.
Show more

Note what the question says:
The information given most strongly supports which of the following general claims?

"most strongly supports" - not "must be true"
Also, it uses the term "general claims" - so what would usually make sense?
If revenue decreases, something will suffer. A city may come up with some innovative ways of raising money but generally speaking, if money is less, some service is bound to suffer.

Also note that no other option makes sense and it is an official question. So GMAT does expect you to arrive at such conclusions.
User avatar
Raman109
User avatar
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Last visit: 28 Jul 2025
Posts: 805
Own Kudos:
170
Given Kudos: 33
Posts: 805
Kudos: 170
When a city experiences a sharp decline in population, the city's tax 05 Nov 2023, 15:23
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Understanding the Argument -
Population decline - tax revenue decline (which impacts the city services such as police protection and maintenance of water lines, as these are paid by taxes collected).
Ares to be policed and served with water line don't decrease.
A tax rate increase to recover the lost revenue is not feasible since it would push (hypothetical) even more residents out.

Option Elimination -

A. If, in a city with a sharply declining population, police protection and water line maintenance do not deteriorate, some other service previously provided by the city will deteriorate or be eliminated.- That makes sense. Let's take an example: A person's salary is $10,000. Out of this, he spends $4000 on the mortgage, $2000 on children's education, $2000 on food, and $2000 in savings. Suppose the salary goes down to $8,000 while the mortgage and children's education are fixed, which accounts for $6,000. So obviously, the person will cut on food and savings. Isnt it? Yes. We can deduce this inference from the argument provided.

B. If a city's tax rates are held stable over a period of time, neither the population nor the levels of city services provided will tend to decline over that period. - We know if the population goes down, tax revenue goes down. Also, increasing the tax rate is not advisable as that would push more people to go out. Let's understand this 2nd part more as it is causing problems. Say 5000 people have a problem with Chicgao's cold weather and plan to relocate to Austin. All these 5000 lived in Cook County in Chicago, which will result in the county's tax revenue. Now, say, the Cook County authorities raise the tax from 10.25 to 20.25%. There may be additional people for whom this tax increase makes living complex, and more people, as a result, move out of Chicago. This option says, "If the tax rates stay stable, say 10.25%, neither population nor services will decline. Did you notice the 5000 are leaving because of cold weather? Even if the tax is stable, it doesn't matter. More people can leave because of the cold or job relocation or any other reason. So, this is out of scope.

C. If a city's population declines sharply, police protection and water line maintenance are the services that deteriorate most immediately and most markedly. We don't know which will be impacted the most. Nothing is mentioned in the argument. These are just examples "such as." Out of scope.

D. A city that suffers revenue losses because of a sharp decline in population can make up some of the lost tax revenue by raising tax rates provided the city's tax rates are low in relation to those of other cities. - In my example, say Chicago's tax rate is 10.25, and another city X is 12.25%. So if Chicago raises to 11.25% less than city X, people can still leave for other reasons? Yes. Distortion.

E. A city that is losing residents because tax rates are perceived as too high by those residents can reverse this population trend by bringing its tax rates down to a more moderate level. - While the passage discussed the impact of tax increases, it doesn't discuss the solution to reverse the population declines as described in this option, which is to tax rate to a moderate level. Distortion.

By the way, Chicago is a wonderful city that I love. :). People who live here enjoy the diverse culture, architecture, culinary delights, winter wonderfest at Navy Pier, and ice skating, to name a few.
User avatar
sachi-in
User avatar
Joined: 12 Oct 2023
Last visit: 18 Oct 2025
Posts: 123
Own Kudos:
284
Given Kudos: 146
Posts: 123
Kudos: 284
When a city experiences a sharp decline in population, the city's tax 10 Jan 2024, 00:59
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
When a city experiences a sharp decline in population, the city's tax revenues, which pay for such city services as police protection and maintenance of water lines, also decrease. The area to be policed and the number and length of the water lines to be maintained, however, do not decrease. Attempting to make up the tax revenue lost by raising tax rates is not feasible, since higher tax rates would cause even more residents to leave.

The information given most strongly supports which of the following general claims?

After elimination was left with option A and D:
D. It's not guaranteed that if tax rates are lower than another town, the people won't move out. Maybe, services provided in comparison to tax rates in other town is better. Hence even if tax rate is increased a bit people might decide to move on to other towns.
Most importantly the Premise declares why this is not feasible hence we simply cannot consider this.

A. If tax increase is not feasible as mentioned in the premise - ofcourse some service quality has to drop - since Police and water can't drop some other must.
User avatar
user1937
User avatar
Joined: 04 Apr 2024
Last visit: 27 Apr 2025
Posts: 69
Own Kudos:
46
Given Kudos: 24
Posts: 69
Kudos: 46
When a city experiences a sharp decline in population, the city's tax 21 Sep 2024, 09:47
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB
Vineetk
When a city experiences a sharp decline in population, the city's tax revenues, which pay for such city services as police protection and maintenance of water lines, also decrease. The area to be policed and the number and length of the water lines to be maintained, however, do not decrease. Attempting to make up the tax revenue lost by raising tax rates is not feasible, since higher tax rates would cause even more residents to leave.

The information given most strongly supports which of the following general claims?

A. If, in a city with sharply declining population, police protection and water line maintenance do not deteriorate, some other service previously provided by the city will deteriorate or be eliminated.

B. If a city's tax rates are held stable over a period of time, neither the population nor the levels of city services provided will tend to decline over that period.

C. If a city's population declines sharply, police protection and water line maintenance are the services that deteriorate most immediately and most markedly.

D. A city that suffers revenue losses because of a sharp decline in population can make up some of the lost tax revenue by raising tax rates, provided the city's tax rates are low in relation to those of other cities.

E. A city that is losing residents because tax rates are perceived as too high by those residents can reverse this population trend by bringing its tax rates down to a more moderate level.
Premises:
Sharp decline in population causes tax revenue to reduce.
But the areas which this revenue supports is still the same such as police protection and maintenance of water lines.
We cannot make up by increasing tax rate since more people will leave.

We need a conclusion. Something that follows from what is given. There should be no new information.

A. If, in a city with sharply declining population, police protection and water line maintenance do not deteriorate, some other service previously provided by the city will deteriorate or be eliminated.
The tax revenues decrease when population decreases. Since the revenues cannot be recovered by raising tax rate (since it will mean more people leaving and consequently lower collection points), it means the revenue will reduce. The need for the revenue does not reduce for at least some services. Hence, some services will certainly suffer. If police protection and water line maintenance do not suffer, something will suffer.
This follows what is given to us in the argument. There is nothing called "this option is incorrect due to usage of extreme language". If the premises give you extreme data, the option will use extreme language.
If the premises give you: "If A happens, B will happen." and "A has happened", what will you conclude? That B WILL HAPPEN. Can you say that the language is too extreme here? No.

B. If a city's tax rates are held stable over a period of time, neither the population nor the levels of city services provided will tend to decline over that period.
We do not know what causes the population to decline. Irrelevant.

C. If a city's population declines sharply, police protection and water line maintenance are the services that deteriorate most immediately and most markedly.
Not known. When the revenue declines, which services take the hit, we don't know. All we can say is that some service will take a hit.

D. A city that suffers revenue losses because of a sharp decline in population can make up some of the lost tax revenue by raising tax rates, provided the city's tax rates are low in relation to those of other cities.
What happens when the city increases tax rate, we cannot say. The premises give us that we cannot make up for lost revenue by increasing tax rate. Are we able to make up for it partially provided the tax rate still remains low, we cannot say. Note that we have no information on why people choose a certain city to live in. Perhaps its tax rate is lower but the quality of air and water isn't that great. Perhaps its cost of living is high. What happens when the tax rate is increased slightly (but is still less than other cities), overall it may not make financial sense for people to stay. The point is, we don't know how people will react if the taxes are raised even a tiny bit. We do know that raising tax rates cannot make up the loss in revenue and that is all. The argument tells us nothing else. We have to stick to the universe created by our argument.

E. A city that is losing residents because tax rates are perceived as too high by those residents can reverse this population trend by bringing its tax rates down to a more moderate level.
Irrelevant. We don't know how to reverse population trend and whether it can be reversed in the first place.

Answer (A)­

Discussion on Inference Questions: https://youtu.be/PMnU9ULdSfs
Show more
Thanks for the answer.

For option (A), the reasoning was that some other service needs to be eliminated as revenues are lost. But we don't know if that would be true for sure. What if the government decides to go into debt? Of course, we are not looking for the absolute solutions, but only the best possible answer choice.

So if the argument that 'what if government decides to go into debt' is considered, what would make option (D) incorrect, because the reason for rejecting option (D) is that 'we do not know what happens when tax rate is increased'. Similarly, we do not know if government would sacrifice some service instead of going into a deficit.
User avatar
DmitryFarber
User avatar
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 22 Mar 2011
Last visit: 08 Nov 2025
Posts: 3,020
Own Kudos:
8,563
 [4]
Given Kudos: 57
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 745 Q86 V90 DI85
Posts: 3,020
Kudos: 8,563
 [4]
When a city experiences a sharp decline in population, the city's tax 21 Sep 2024, 15:23
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
user1937

You're right that A requires some loose or sloppy reasoning. We don't necessarily know how they will handle the loss of revenue. Maybe they'll just hand down pay cuts or dig into the city's reserves. Maybe they will have a bake sale! All we know is that something have to give, and what A describes is plausible.

D, on the other hand, isn't possible, because it directly contradicts the passage. We're told that raising taxes will NOT work because more people will leave. D is just trying to say "well you can do it a little." It would be like if the passage said "Anna is vegan, so she eats no meat" and D said "This pizza just has little bits of meat, so she'll eat it."
User avatar
Pranavsawant
User avatar
Joined: 20 Jun 2025
Last visit: 16 Nov 2025
Posts: 87
Own Kudos:
7
Given Kudos: 316
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Posts: 87
Kudos: 7
When a city experiences a sharp decline in population, the city's tax 03 Nov 2025, 18:37
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
There is a glaring problem with option A.
" If, in a city with sharply declining population, police protection and water line maintenance do not deteriorate, some other service previously provided by the city will deteriorate or be eliminated."

It could very well be the case that the govt is increasing taxes while maintaining the quality of services. Yes, more people will leave but the option never states that controlling the population is the goal. So in a city with a sharply declining propulation (with the tax rates being a contributor as well), we very well could have the scenario in which quality of services i smaintained. Isn't that a direct counterexample to A?
User avatar
bb
User avatar
Founder
Joined: 04 Dec 2002
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 42,384
Own Kudos:
82,113
Given Kudos: 24,107
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
GPA: 3
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
Posts: 42,384
Kudos: 82,113
When a city experiences a sharp decline in population, the city's tax 03 Nov 2025, 19:13
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
You cannot argue against the passage. This is what defines the rules. You may not like the rules but you have to play by the rules.

It’s kinda like watching one of the superhero movies about Superman and arguing that people cannot fly. Yes people cannot fly but there’s a story why Superman can fly apparently - those are the rules. Everyone understands that people cannot fly but everyone has also accepted the fictional rules of the story to enjoy the story.

So except the critical reasoning rules and enjoy the story. 😇 We are explicitly told that raising the revenue is not an option. So, it’s not an option you should be considering as you will waste a lot of time and get the answer wrong.

Attempting to make up the tax revenue lost by raising tax rates is not feasible, since higher tax rates would cause even more residents to leave.

Pranavsawant
There is a glaring problem with option A.
" If, in a city with sharply declining population, police protection and water line maintenance do not deteriorate, some other service previously provided by the city will deteriorate or be eliminated."

It could very well be the case that the govt is increasing taxes while maintaining the quality of services. Yes, more people will leave but the option never states that controlling the population is the goal. So in a city with a sharply declining propulation (with the tax rates being a contributor as well), we very well could have the scenario in which quality of services i smaintained. Isn't that a direct counterexample to A?
Show more
User avatar
glagad
User avatar
Joined: 03 Jun 2022
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 139
Own Kudos:
20
Given Kudos: 100
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Posts: 139
Kudos: 20
When a city experiences a sharp decline in population, the city's tax 12 Nov 2025, 09:14
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I am trying to understand the flaw in my reasoning. The reason I rejected A is that while the passage talks about a reduction in the revenue through taxes due to population decrease and it acknowledges that taxes can't be increased, it nowhere states that there is no other way to earn money/add to govt's corpus of money.

Option A talks about definite reduction/elimination of services, whereas the govt very well could have money added from other sources and thus not require reduction/elimination of services.

May I know why is it fair not to think in this manner and reject A?
User avatar
bb
User avatar
Founder
Joined: 04 Dec 2002
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 42,384
Own Kudos:
82,113
Given Kudos: 24,107
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
GPA: 3
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
Posts: 42,384
Kudos: 82,113
When a city experiences a sharp decline in population, the city's tax 12 Nov 2025, 12:54
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
glagad
I am trying to understand the flaw in my reasoning. The reason I rejected A is that while the passage talks about a reduction in the revenue through taxes due to population decrease and it acknowledges that taxes can't be increased, it nowhere states that there is no other way to earn money/add to govt's corpus of money.

Option A talks about definite reduction/elimination of services, whereas the govt very well could have money added from other sources and thus not require reduction/elimination of services.

May I know why is it fair not to think in this manner and reject A?
Show more

This has to do with the scope of the passage. The scope seems to be centered around decline, resource management, and reaction and thus if some parts do not shrink, some others will have to or money will have to be raised somehow. This is a case where none of the answer choices feel fuzzy and comfortable and it is more about which option is MORE wrong than the other. I see a lot of people picking D, which we are told is not feasible.

Also, this is not a business plan competition where the best idea wins, and the argument has to stay within the confines and wihtin the scope of the argument. Finding other sources of funding is NOT an option entertained and while you can, that's not usually how this question type works (some question types do need additional information for weaken or strengthen for example) but in this case, we play within the boundaries.
   1   2 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
miag
188 posts