Q19 - Economist: Although average hourly

[yunjh2725]

Hi,

I chose D because it said "varied considerably," whereas Answer B says "employers moved MANY."
How can I distinguish what's a better answer.
I guess for D, one can object that "yes, the wage varied considerably from region to region but there were many more High-paying jobs than low-paying jobs." Ex. $15 (20 regions) and $8 (3 regions). So regions vary CONSIDERABLY but there are only 3 regions with low paying wages versus 20 regions with very high min. wage.
But for B, it also says "employers moved MANY full time jobs." Many can mean 1 or 2, no? So, what if these employers moved to 1 or 2 jobs to lower paying regions?

Thanks!!

[hannnn.wang]

Hi yunjh2725,

I got this answer right but only figured out why (B) worked after taking it. I eliminated (D) immediately because in the stimulus the economist already said that "although average hourly wages vary considerably between different regions" - so regardless whether hourly wages increased/decreased, the variance was already taken into consideration and definitely wouldn't be the answer. The test-maker already knew we'd think of this first and put (D) there as the wrong answer.

(B) works perfectly, even when only 1 job is moved. For the purpose of simplicity, consider the following scenario where there are 2 regions and there are 2 jobs in each region:

Last year
Region A $15/hr $15/hr (2 jobs)
Region B $10/hr $10/hr (2 jobs)
region ave.
A: $15/hr
B: $10/hr
country ave. $12.5/hr


This year
A $16/hr (1 job)
B $10.1/hr $10.1/hr $10.1/hr (3 jobs)
region ave.
A: $16/hr
B: $10.1/hr
country ave. $11.575/hr

So in this way, each region's ave increases while country's ave decreases. This also works on a bigger scale.

Hope this helps.

[ohthatpatrick]

Outstanding response! I'll put up our complete explanation .

Question Type: Explain the Discrepancy

Reading Task:
Given that ________ is true, why is it that ______ is true?

Given that in every region, avg wage went up
Why is it that in the country as a whole, avg wage went down?

------------------------
Tricky paradox! That seems impossible at first glance. In EVERY region of a country, avg wage went up. So how the heck could the country's average wage have gone down?

There is actually only one possible mathematical answer to that I can think of. It's rare for an Explain question to have only one possible answer. It's usually risky to even try predicting the answer since the test writers like to surprise us with the way in which they resolve the paradox.

But in this case, they knew the actual math was so dense, that an average LSAT student (who hasn't worked with math in many, many years) would have a hard time arriving at it on their own.

It MUST involve some geographic re-shuffling of jobs. Only (B) deals with that.

Suppose in Silicon Valley, the average wage is $100/hr.
Billy lives in Silicon Valley and makes $80/hr, below average for the region.

In Detroit, the average wage is $60/hr. Billy moves to Detroit and starts making $70/hr there.
It's less than he made before, but it's more than the average Detroit worker.

In Detroit, someone moved IN who makes MORE than the average Detroit worker (pulling the average up)

In Silicon Valley, someone who made LESS than the regional average (and was therefore dragging the average down) moved OUT.

By moving from Silicon Valley to Detroit, Billy raised the average of both regions.

But on a national scale, Billy used to make $80 and now makes $70, so his contribution to the national average LOWERS it.

The previous poster provided wonderful real numbers ... just thought I'd give a slightly more conversational version for anyone who sees numbers and goes numb.

If you're VERY math savvy and understand weighted averages, you could actually have predicted the correct answer to this problem.

If you couldn't figure out the math in the moment, the best pre-phrase you could do for yourself here would be to think
1. I know it's something very math-y
2. I know it deals with a distinction between REGION and COUNTRY (part and whole, if you prefer)

(A) Last three years? Who cares. And nothing here gets at how the average of each REGION could have gone up.

(B) Moving a job from REGION to REGION? I guess that would affect both Regions AND Country.
Moved from "relatively high wage" to "relatively low wage"? I guess that would explain a DECREASE in the national average. Keep it.

(C) A change in the unemployment rate COULD affect average wage, because anyone who makes above or below the average will affect the average by dropping out of the total pool. But since this answer doesn't deal with REGION vs. COUNTRY, it has no explanatory value for the paradox.

(D) Varied considerably from REGION to REGION? Maybe that could affect both region and country. Nothing here seems to explain why there is a DECREASE in national average. This is just saying "some regions went UP a little, some went UP a lot". How can we explain the national average going DOWN?

(E) Manufacturing vs. Service? We're looking for REGION vs. COUNTRY.

(B) is the correct answer