Another CR Question (SET 28)

[Man_of_Honour]

Q 18:
Which of the following most logically completes the passage?
Concerned about financial well-being of its elderly citizens, the government of Runagiadecided two years ago to increase by 20 percent the government provided pension paid to all Runagians over 65. Inflation in the intervening
period has been negligible,and the increase has been duly received by all eligible Runagians. Nevertheless,many of them are no better off financially than they were before the increase, in large part because ________.

A. They rely entirely on the government pension for their income
B. Runagian banks are so inefficient that it can take up to three weeks to cash a pension check
C. They buy goods whose prices tend to rise especially fast in times of
inflation
D. The pension was increased when the number of elderly Runagians below
the poverty level reached an all-time high
E. In Runagia children typically supplement the income of elderly parents, but
only by enough to provide them with a comfortable living

Originally Posted by Man_of_Honour

Q 18:
Which of the following most logically completes the passage?
Concerned about financial well-being of its elderly citizens, the government of Runagiadecided two years ago to increase by 20 percent the government provided pension paid to all Runagians over 65. Inflation in the intervening
period has been negligible,and the increase has been duly received by all eligible Runagians. Nevertheless,many of them are no better off financially than they were before the increase, in large part because ________.

A. They rely entirely on the government pension for their income
B. Runagian banks are so inefficient that it can take up to three weeks to cash a pension check
C. They buy goods whose prices tend to rise especially fast in times of
inflation
D. The pension was increased when the number of elderly Runagians below
the poverty level reached an all-time high
E. In Runagia children typically supplement the income of elderly parents, but
only by enough to provide them with a comfortable living

What is the source of this question?

I don't think it's particularly well written, but I think the answer must be D. A, B, and C seem dead wrong. An argument could be made for E, but then the question wouldn't make sense because the gov't would have no reason for concern in the first place.

[Man_of_Honour]

OA given is E.

Originally Posted by Man_of_Honour

OA given is E.

That's odd - where did this question come from?

The argument that could be made for E would be that since the children are providing for their parents, the increase in pension isn't going to make much of a difference [for the parents] - i.e. 'many of them are no better off than they were before the increase.'

What doesn't make sense to me, though, is, in the case above, why the gov't would be concerned in the first place. Also, saying 'no better off than they were before' seems to imply that they weren't in good shape to begin with, which would go against the notion that they were 'comfortable' originally.

I hope it's not a question from the OG.

[ranjeet_1975]

I think that the answer should be D because the pension was increased when the more poorer people join and therefore many pensioners could not better off financially.

From E we can say that the pensioners must become financially better off because more the pension fund more they are financially sound as the living cost is meted by their children

[amit_ace]

E is correct.
The question talks about whether the people were better off financially before the increase in pension.It nowhere suggests that elderly people were poor.

for eg - money per month for comfortable living =$1000 usd.
old pension $700 children contribution $300
new pension $840 children contribution $160
So old people are not really financially better off than they were before.