Magieta

Thank you, ursula, I will try to follow this approach and will abandon all Barron's materials...

Thank you, ursula, I have just begun to think I am not clever enough to sit for GMAT. Barron's is full of dull arguments that may make you feel upset. I will leave this book aside. Thank you

Thank you, ursula, I now agree with your opinion, but the problem is that I cannot view the problem in such aspect when I read the argument myself. A question may have different aspects and I have to choose the aspect that the GMAT composers would like to see. How have you learned to choose the right direction of reasoning?

The answer is E and the explanation is that the rate of turnover is another way of measuring mobility and not a factor that affects stability or mobility. But I cannot understand why. Imagine you occupy a an office or a position with high rate of turnover due to the seasonal character of the job. Then your stability depends on this rate, notwithstanding your trainingskills, status, high income or so on.... True, rate of turnover is a measure of stability, bit it is also a factor. Or may be I cannot understand what the term "stability" means. Btw how do you understand the question, I have no clear idea about what the author is asking for.

The correct answer is E and the explanation is similar to that of Ursula, but Ursula explained/illustrated how question 1 asked to both guards will tell us who the liar is. The explanation in the textbook shows only the strategy for acheiving the freedom, but not the way. That is why I asked you for help. Many thanks to Ursula for the thorough explanation. Here is the textbook explanation: "In order to acheive your freedom, you must first ascertain whether your guards are honest or liars. This is only possible by asking question 1 to both guards. Two answers in the affirmative will indicate they are both honest and two answers in the negative will indicate they are both liars. As soon as you have ascertained the honesty or otherwise of either guard, you can ask with certainty whether a particular door leads to freedom."

Please, GMAT_HELP, explain why you think the answer is E?

So, what is the right answer and why?

I'm sorry, I have mistaken one of the choices, here is the correct casus :o Imagine you are a prisoner. Two prison guards, Jake and Jim, defend two doors. One door leads to death, the other to your life and freedom.Each of the guards either always tells the truth, or laways lies. Both may be truth-tellers, both may be liars, or one may be a liar and the other a truth-teller. You are allowed to choose from the following questions to discover which door leads to your release. 1. Is your comrade the same as you? 2. Are you guarding the door of life and liberty? 3. Is your comrade lying? 4.Are you telling the truth? Which of the following combinations will lead you for certain freedom? A. 3 to Jake, 4 to Jim, 2 to Jake B. 3 to Jim, 2 to Jake, 1 to Jim C. 2 to Jim, 2 to Jake, 3 to Jake D. 4 to Jim, 1 to Jim, 2 to Jake E. 1 to Jim, 1 to Jake, 2 to Jim

Imagine you are a prisoner. Two prison guards, Jake and Jim, defend two doors. One door leads to death, the other to your life and freedom.Each of the guards either always tells the truth, or laways lies. Both may be truth-tellers, both may be liars, or one may be a liar and the other a truth-teller. You are allowed to choose from the following questions to discover which door leads to your release. 1. Is your comrade the same as you? 2. Are you guarding the door of life and liberty? 3. Is your comrade lying? 4.Are you telling the truth? Which of the following combinations will lead you for certain freedom? A. 3 to Jake, 4 to Jim, 2 to Jake B. 3 to Jim, 2 to Jake, 1 to Jim C. 2 to Jim, 2 to Jake, 3 to Jake D. 4 to Jim, 1 to Jim, 2 to Jake E. 1 to Jim, 2 to Jake, 2 to Jim

Thank you, Vreddy, I have niticed that Barron's reasoning is quite different from that of Kaplan or that of [tooltip=Official Guide]OG[/tooltip], but I didn't know that it differed so much from real GMAT reasonong.

Administrators and executives are members of the most stable occupation. The stability mentioned in the above statement could be dependent on each of the following factors EXCEPT: A. Training skills B. Nature of the occupation C. Status D. Relatively high income E. Rate of turnover

What do you mean, Vreddy, Barron's is not a reliable source of information?

Yes, the correct answer is C, but why not B? I think that we should find the error on Dyner's reasoning by examining what he stated and not by assuming whether it is possible or not for a country to affect the aggregate supply on the market. Besides, the labor market is so unpredictable, that we cannot say for sure that a country with only 2 % of total world oil sales cannot affect the world price of petroleum, we may only ASSUME this. So C is not an outright answer. I think that B is the correct answer,because Dyner's reply is not pertinent to the the proposal of the Minister of Finance. The Minister of Finance is interested in how to earn foreign exchange, and Dyner is interested in foreign exchange ravenue- this means production goals v. financial goals. We should not assume anything in order to say that Dyner's reasoning is fallacious. We can simply say (by what is explicitly stated) that Dyner do not respond to the Minister of Finance but shifts the topic - from production to revenue.

The correct answer is D. The explanation is: The educational level affects the participation rate in the labor force, while the number of employment agencies does not. Employment agencies are involved in the distribution and direction of labor supply, but they do not affect the quantitative supply. I do not completely agree with this explanation, because I think that employment agencies could affect the participation rates in the labor force. The more the agencies, the more people available for work. I mean, agencies act as a mediator between people and the labor market. Less people will be able to attain to labor market without the help of these agencies and that is how the latter could affect the supply of labor force. What do you think about my reasoning? As for the educational level- it affects the qualitative composition rather than the quantitative supply. True, students are, by principle, unable to take part in the labor force while in the university,but it is also true that many students work while studying, because this is the only means to collect money for education. So, I think that C may or may not affect the quantity of labor force, while agencies do affect it for sure. This question is from "How to prepare for the GMAT"- Barron's Ninth Edition. It is full with the most awful CR questions, I skip most of them, because they sound absurd to me. I will share some other of them with you. It is possible that somebody may appear to be interested with them. Thank's : Maggy

Harry Dyner was the Minister of Petroleum in a small oil-producing country. His country's oil exports were approximately 2 percent of total world oil sales. The Minister of Finance was anxious to maximize petroleum production and export to earn foreign exchange. Dyner, however, believed that increased sales would only drive down the world price of petroleum and lower his country's foreign exchange revenue. Which of the following would best exemplify an error on Dyner's reasoning? (A) Price of rude v. price of refined petroleum (B) Production goals v. financial goals © The supply produced by a single country v. aggregate supply on the market (D) Seasonal v. long-term supply (E) Long-term v. short-term demand