Citing the fact that the real gross domestic product (RC)

[rx_11]

Source: GMAT Prep

Citing the fact that the real gross domestic product (GDP) per capita was higher in 1997 than ever before, some journalists have argued that the United States economy performed ideally in 1997. However, the real GDP is almost always higher than ever before; it falls only during recessions. One point these journalists overlooked is that in 1997, as in the twenty-four years immediately preceding it, the real GDP per capita grew nearly one-half percent a year more slowly than it had on average between 1873 and 1973. Were the 1997 economy as robust as claimed, the growth rate of real GDP per capita in 1997 would have surpassed the average growth rate of real GDP per capita between 1873 and 1973 because over fifty percent of the population worked for wages in 1997 whereas only forty percent worked for wages between 1873 and 1973. If the growth rate of labor productivity (output per hour of goods and services) in 1997 had equaled its average growth rate between 1873 and 1973 of more than two percent, then, given the proportionately larger workforce that existed in 1997, real GDP per capita in 1997 would have been higher than it actually was, since output is a major factor in GDP. However, because labor productivity grew by only one percent in 1997, real GDP per capita grew more slowly in 1997 than it had on average between 1873 and 1973.

Q1
It can be inferred from the passage that which of the following is the reason that the author faults the journalists referred to in line?

A. They believe that the real GDP per capita in 1997 was higher than the real GDP per capita had ever been before.
B. They argue that the rate at which real GDP per capita grew in 1997 was faster than the average rate at which it had grown between 1873 and 1973.
C. They overestimate the effect of labor productivity on the real GDP per capita in 1997.
D. They overestimate the amount by which real GDP per capita in 1997 surpassed real GDP per capita in earlier years.
E. They fail to consider the real GDP per capita in 1997 within an appropriate historical context.
OA: E

Q2
According to the passage, which of the following is true of the average rate at which real GDP per capita grew in the twenty-four years immediately before 1997?
A. It was less than it had been between 1873 and 1973 because only forty percent of the population worked for wages between 1873 and 1973.
B. It was less than it had been between 1873 and 1973 because labor productivity grew less between 1973 and 1997 than it had between 1873 and 1973.
C. It was less than it had been between 1873 and 1973 as a result of an increase in the percentage of the population earning wages during these years.
D. It was less than the average rate at which real GDP per capita grew between 1873 and 1973.
E. It was less than the rate at which real GDP per capita grew in 1997.

OA: D


Dear instructors,

Could u explain why B is wrong in Q1? I agree that E is correct. However, I think B is also correct because of the underlined part above. Could u shed some light on it? Thanks very much!

Best regards.

rx_11.

[RonPurewal]

B. They argue that the rate at which real GDP per capita grew in 1997 was faster than the average rate at which it had grown between 1873 and 1973.
...
Could u explain why B is wrong in Q1? I agree that E is correct. However, I think B is also correct because of the underlined part above. Could u shed some light on it? Thanks very much!

first, just to make sure this is clear, "they" in this answer choice refers to the journalists, not to the author of the passage. (the author of the passage is singular -- note that it's not "authors" -- so the pronoun "they" cannot refer to the author of the passage.)

the passage states that the journalists failed to consider this fact -- i.e., the implication is that the journalists didn't make ANY sort of comparison between the 1997 rate and the 1873-1973 average (the latter of which is the "appropriate historical context" mentioned in the correct answer choice). there is definitely no evidence from which to claim that the journalists make the claim posited in choice (b) -- a claim that contradicts the factual information that you underlined (passage says "half as fast"; choice b says "faster").

also, beware of picking answer choices that contain almost exactly the same words that appear in the original passage, as this one does.
unless the question starts with "According to the passage" or "The passage indicates", DO NOT pick an answer choice whose wording is almost identical to the wording of the passage itself, unless you are absolutely, 100%, do-or-die sure that it is correct; that is perhaps the most common type of "trap" answer on all of RC.

[urshohini]

Thanks Ron for pointing this out. I had primarily picked up A as it was mentioned in the passage as it is. Now i know that for an inference type of question, such choices indicate that they are wrong!
thanks once again!

B. They argue that the rate at which real GDP per capita grew in 1997 was faster than the average rate at which it had grown between 1873 and 1973.
...
Could u explain why B is wrong in Q1? I agree that E is correct. However, I think B is also correct because of the underlined part above. Could u shed some light on it? Thanks very much!

first, just to make sure this is clear, "they" in this answer choice refers to the journalists, not to the author of the passage. (the author of the passage is singular -- note that it's not "authors" -- so the pronoun "they" cannot refer to the author of the passage.)

the passage states that the journalists failed to consider this fact -- i.e., the implication is that the journalists didn't make ANY sort of comparison between the 1997 rate and the 1873-1973 average (the latter of which is the "appropriate historical context" mentioned in the correct answer choice). there is definitely no evidence from which to claim that the journalists make the claim posited in choice (b) -- a claim that contradicts the factual information that you underlined (passage says "half as fast"; choice b says "faster").

also, beware of picking answer choices that contain almost exactly the same words that appear in the original passage, as this one does.
unless the question starts with "According to the passage" or "The passage indicates", DO NOT pick an answer choice whose wording is almost identical to the wording of the passage itself, unless you are absolutely, 100%, do-or-die sure that it is correct; that is perhaps the most common type of "trap" answer on all of RC.

[RonPurewal]

sure thing

[khushbumerchant]

(Same passage)
....
Citing the fact that the real gross domestic product (GDP) per capita was higher in 1997 than ever before, some journalists have argued that the United States economy performed ideally in 1997.
....

Q3
It can be inferred from the passage that which of the following is the reason that the author faults the journalists referred to in the highlighted text?

A. They believe that the real GDP per capita in 1997 was higher than the real GDP per capita has ever been. Definitely not
B. They argue that the rate at which real GDP per capita grew in 1997 was faster than the average rate at which it had grown between 1873 to 1973. Journalist are not arguing, but they were quoted by author
C. They overestimate the effect of labor productivity on the real GDP per capita in 1997. Labor productivity is not relevant here
D. They overestimate the amount by which real GDP per capita in 1997 surpassed real GDP per capita in earlier years. This is what I selected, but apparently it is wrong
E. They fail to consider the real GDP per capita in 1997 within an appropriate historical context. Historical context...???

OA: E

i. Can someone help me understand why E and not D?
ii. Also, is there a method-to-madness which can be applied to easily identify answers to "inference" questions. They almost every time throw me away.

Thanks in advance.

[RonPurewal]

Citing the fact that the real gross domestic product (GDP) per capita was higher in 1997 than ever before, some journalists have argued that the United States economy performed ideally in 1997.
....

yellow on white!
my eyes!

D. They overestimate the amount by which real GDP per capita in 1997 surpassed real GDP per capita in earlier years. This is what I selected, but apparently it is wrong

yep. no evidence for this.
the passage says only this:
the journalists cited the fact that real GDP per capita was at a maximum.
they didn't say anything about the margin between that maximum and other historical values.

E. They fail to consider the real GDP per capita in 1997 within an appropriate historical context. Historical context...???

the "historical context" corresponds exactly to the words that are underlined in the first post of this thread.
i.e., if you look at the past 24 years (including 1997) vis-à-vis the previous 100 years, it becomes clear that the journalists are wrong.

(note: you don't have to understand the specifics here; i definitely don't understand them right now. that's not the point; the point is just to notice how the passage is using the evidence, even if you don't understand the evidence itself at all.)

[RonPurewal]

ii. Also, is there a method-to-madness which can be applied to easily identify answers to "inference" questions. They almost every time throw me away.

if you're looking for "rules" here ... yeah, that's not going to happen.

just keep in mind that you have to stay within the boundaries of the given information -- in other words, you have to "think inside the box".
so, just pick the choice that takes existing information and merely "re-packages" it.

[sh.pradeep]

same passage..

Citing the fact that the real gross domestic product (GDP) per capita was higher in 1997 than ever before, some journalists have argued that the United States economy performed ideally in 1997. However, the real GDP is almost always higher than ever before; it falls only during recessions.

Q 4. The author of the passage asserts that " the GDP is almost always higher than ever before" (bold portion) most probably in order to

A. show that a fact cited in support of a claim is inaccurate.
B. show that a fact cited in support of a claim actually contradicts the claim
C. show that a fact cited in support of a claim doesnot prove the claim
D. explain why a fact cited in support of a claim is relevant to the claim
E. explain how the proponent of a claim selected a fact cited in support of a claim.

Dear Experts,

I am stuck between A & C.

In this passage the author presents various facts which show that GDP did not perform ideally in 1997 and hence "the fact cited ( by journalists) in support of claim are innaccurate.

But I see that C is also correct. OA is C.

Could you explain how to refute A?


Regards

[sh.pradeep]

(Same passage)
....
Citing the fact that the real gross domestic product (GDP) per capita was higher in 1997 than ever before, some journalists have argued that the United States economy performed ideally in 1997.
....

Q3
It can be inferred from the passage that which of the following is the reason that the author faults the journalists referred to in the highlighted text?

A. They believe that the real GDP per capita in 1997 was higher than the real GDP per capita has ever been. Definitely not
B. They argue that the rate at which real GDP per capita grew in 1997 was faster than the average rate at which it had grown between 1873 to 1973. Journalist are not arguing, but they were quoted by author
C. They overestimate the effect of labor productivity on the real GDP per capita in 1997. Labor productivity is not relevant here
D. They overestimate the amount by which real GDP per capita in 1997 surpassed real GDP per capita in earlier years. This is what I selected, but apparently it is wrong
E. They fail to consider the real GDP per capita in 1997 within an appropriate historical context. Historical context...???

OA: E

i. Can someone help me understand why E and not D?
ii. Also, is there a method-to-madness which can be applied to easily identify answers to "inference" questions. They almost every time throw me away.

Thanks in advance.

Dear Experts,

In the same question, could you explain why A is wrong?

If GDP per capita was at maximum, journalists must have believed that " the real GDP per capita in 1997 was higher than the real GDP per capita had ever been". exactly what A says.

I do not doubt the explanation that E is correct, but I chose A for the reason stated above. Please help


Regards

[RonPurewal]

you're not answering the question.

the question is NOT "which of these statements did the journalists believe?"

rather, the question asks why the author faults the journalists-- i.e., why the author is criticizing the journalists.
if choice A is taken alone, then it actually appears to be good evidence for the journalists' statements; the reason why it's NOT good evidence is the correct answer.

[sh.pradeep]

Thanks a lot Ron for removing my doubts.

I have one more question, which has bold portion, few posts above. It will be really healpful if you could spare some thoughts.

Thanks in advance.

Regards

[RonPurewal]

sorry, could you please re-post the question? thanks.

[sh.pradeep]

same passage..

Citing the fact that the real gross domestic product (GDP) per capita was higher in 1997 than ever before, some journalists have argued that the United States economy performed ideally in 1997. However, the real GDP is almost always higher than ever before; it falls only during recessions.

Q 4. The author of the passage asserts that " the GDP is almost always higher than ever before" (bold portion) most probably in order to

A. show that a fact cited in support of a claim is inaccurate.
B. show that a fact cited in support of a claim actually contradicts the claim
C. show that a fact cited in support of a claim doesnot prove the claim
D. explain why a fact cited in support of a claim is relevant to the claim
E. explain how the proponent of a claim selected a fact cited in support of a claim.

Dear Experts,

I am stuck between A & C.

In this passage the author presents various facts which show that GDP did not perform ideally in 1997 and hence "the fact cited ( by journalists) in support of claim are innaccurate.

But I see that C is also correct. OA is C.

Could you explain how to refute A?

[RonPurewal]

no one is disputing the fact (= real GDP is at an all-time high).

the author's point is, basically, "yes, that's a fact—but it doesn't mean what you think it does."

[RonPurewal]

incidentally, there's no such thing as 'showing that a fact ... is inaccurate'.

if something is a fact, then, by definition, it is accurate!

so, we can eliminate choice A immediately, even if we have no idea what the author is actually saying.