[求助]TTGWD11-Q35 to Q37

杰西卡的戈多 · 发表于 2009-2-15 17:53:00

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.

Q6 -- Q37:   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 4?

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.

求思路！！！

[此贴子已经被作者于2009-2-15 17:55:21编辑过]

ezailshi · 发表于 2009-3-18 21:44:00

同问。

好好学习 · 发表于 2009-5-22 18:17:00

同问

mm007_mmgmat · 发表于 2009-6-10 20:52:00

However, the real GDP is almost always higher than ever before; it falls only during recessions.

be7linda · 发表于 2010-10-27 22:25:45

C. They overestimate the effect of labor productivity on the real GDP per capita in 1997.

C为什么错了? 有没有牛牛解释一下哦~

sunnylbs · 发表于 2011-1-1 16:07:24

我也想问。。。大过节的在这做GWD。。。还有哪位不过节的大牛解释下吧。。。

妞妞扭扭 · 发表于 2011-5-18 16:35:25

However, the real GDP is almost always higher than ever before; it falls only during recessions.

-- by 会员 mm007_mmgmat (2009/6/10 20:52:00)

One point these journalists overlooked is that in 1997, as
in the twenty-four years immediately preceding it, 我做的时候定位是这句，但是看了这个TX的，觉的他的定位更准些。

viridian · 发表于 2011-7-3 14:24:52

同问~~~~~~~~~~~~~

小伊YSY · 发表于 2011-9-20 00:05:19

嘀咕嘀咕，欢迎拍砖。

题目问作者如何指责出journalists的错误，这需要站在记者的角度去思考GDP，而记者并没有像作者一样，去考虑了各种相关的细则概念（如labor productivity，GDP growth），则：

A.本是既成事实，作者并没有否认数据不正确，而是辩驳了这个既成数据的理解方法。另外，结合作者提到的例外的recession状况，这个地方条件也不是很充足去判断A一定成立。
B.GDPgrowth是作者概念，而非记者的
C.labor productivity也是作者的
D.原文讨论的不是GDP增量，而是GDP growth的增量，D无关
E.比较general的概括了问题，指出了作者指责记者想法的大体方向。

半阙 · 发表于 2011-10-18 10:36:28

这题我也错选了B~~现在明白了：journalists只是说1997年经济很理想，作者反驳说他们忽视了GDP在1997年的增长比1873——1973慢了0.5%. 这里的they指的是那些journalist，而B 说的是作者的观点

[求助]TTGWD11-Q35 to Q37

[求助]TTGWD11-Q35 to Q37

所属分类: GMAT考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()