扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / GMATAdvanced-CR-5
Columnist: Metro City has a lower percentage of residents with humanities degrees than any other city of comparable size in our nation. Nationwide, university graduates generally earn more than people who are not university graduates, but those with humanities degrees typically earn less than do graduates with degrees in other disciplines. So the main reason Metro City has higher income per capita than any other city of comparable size in our nation must be its low percentage of residents with humanities degrees.
Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the columnist's argument?
Metro City residents with humanities degrees have higher income per capita than do people with humanities degrees in any other city of comparable size in the nation.
The percentage of residents with university degrees is lower in Metro City than in any other city of comparable size in the nation.
Nationwide, university graduates without humanities degrees typically earn more than do individuals without university degrees.
Metro City residents with degrees outside the humanities have per capita income no higher than the per capita income of such residents of other cities of comparable size in the nation.
In Metro City, a lower proportion of university graduates have humanities degrees than in any other city of comparable size in the nation.
人均收入=理科人均*理科比例+文科人均*文科比例+不上大学人均*不上大学比例
已知理科人均>文科人均>不上大学人均，且M市文科比例<理科比例及不上大学比例，求证M市收入高是文科比例较低导致的。
D答案：
M市理科和不上大学的人均都不会高于其他城市，那就是控制好人均部分变量，纯看比例了。
M市收入要高，假设理科人均和不上大学人均都取极限—与其他城市持平，低收入的比例越少，高收入的比例越高，就可以拉高整体人均收入。
此不严谨的地方在于还有两个变量未知：
1. 低收入人均-M市会不会大大高于其他城市？
2. 不上大学比例-M市会不会远远小于其他城市？若成立真正拖其他城市后腿的是不上大学那波人
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论