Top Law Schools

**Edited**
Sorry.
PT #10, section 4 (logic reasoning), question 23.


The answer is D.
But I don't understand. Isn't this choice much like B?
If most of the loss of the population is from babies (let's say about 48% of the 50%), then only 2% of working adults die or emigrate, which mean the high percentage of workers are still retained (much like B)

Kaplan's answer key wrote:
(D).. something about how birth rates do not have an immediate effect on the work force in the following decade.

Maybe I've been studying too much. But this makes no sense to me.
Anyone want to shed some new light on this? Or maybe show me why my reasoning is wrong?

copyright infringement is not something that a forum dedicated to law school students will take lightly.

EDIT: delete the post and just tell us the PT and Question #

Yeah, copyright infringement = bad.

Also, babies are not good workers and the question is looking for an answer that does not provide support.

Note the word in caps, "LEAST." If one of the answers does not contribute to the explanation and the other four do, the one that doesn't contribute is correct.

birdlaw117 wrote:Yeah, copyright infringement = bad.

Also, babies are not good workers and the question is looking for an answer that does not provide support.

Yeah I changed it.

Anyway. I understand that babies are not good workers. But given the fact that these "useless workers" are the ones that make up half of the population lost, doesn't that mean "useful workers" haven't died and still abundant? (because they didn't die. The babies died)

lol, you're still infringing on Kaplan's copyright. but they deserve it for giving a bad explanation. Kaplan assumes that 8 yr olds didn't work. this is wrong, especially in 1840s Ireland which was completely agricultural.

That said, I only did PTs 28 on and I never saw an LR like this. They don't make them like this anymore. It's a mixture of being a bad question and a very hard question.


EDIT: haha, missed the least. this is a horrible question.

senorhosh wrote:

birdlaw117 wrote:Yeah, copyright infringement = bad.

Also, babies are not good workers and the question is looking for an answer that does not provide support.

Yeah I changed it.

Anyway. I understand that babies are not good workers. But given the fact that these "useless workers" are the ones that make up half of the population lost, doesn't that mean "useful workers" haven't died and still abundant? (because they didn't die. The babies died)

It says the births made up for the losses, not that the babies were the ones who died. In other words, old folks died and babies took their place.

lol

Sometimes you can read so much you get numb in the head.

D is the only answer that provides info that is essentially irrelevant. You can make inferences based on D, but D in itself tells you nothing.

JazzOne wrote:
It says the births made up for the losses, not that the babies were the ones who died. In other words, old folks died and babies took their place.

lol

Sometimes you can read so much you get numb in the head.

OMG thanks.

-_________________________-
I've been studying all day. Nothing is going through.

I mistook the word "compensation" as not making up for the loss of population, but "making up" for loss of population.
Know what I mean?
Neither do I.

THANKS THOUGH