0

Source: p 145, Mastering the National Admissions Test for Law, Mark Shepherd.

Lower middle of para 3: ...Added to this, there was the administrative practice in the 1980s and 1990s of re- classifying the unemployed as incapacitated, thereby reducing the unemployment claimant count. This practice was followed particularly rigorously in some of the areas with the highest unemployment rates.

24. The effect of the administrative practice of re- classifying the unemployed as incapacitated would be likely to be that: (a) Unemployment claimant count would be reduced (b) Incapacity claimant count would be increased (c) Accuracy of government statistics would be reduced (d) All of the above
(e) None of the above

(a) to (c), (e). INCORRECT. See (d).
(d) CORRECT. Under the policy in question, people were effectively being transferred from the unemployment claimant count to the incapacity claimant count. This would inevitably diminish the accuracy of the statistics as people were being classifi ed wrongly (presumably for political reasons, so as to reduce unemployment fi gures).

Why's (c) right? The passage says nothing about government statistics. It's possible that the government did record and track the people whose counts were transferred?

2
  • 4
    This question appears to be off-topic because it is about the logical interplay of a very specific set of elements within a single passage. The issue, as described, cannot be resolved by any increase to English fluency such as this community is equipped to provide. A high level of fluency is required merely to understand the question as well as the querant already does, and it is unlikely to have any bearing on the efforts of present or future users to further their English language learning. Commented Sep 17, 2014 at 21:54
  • Please discuss the proposed closure of this and several similar questions here. Commented Sep 17, 2014 at 21:54

2 Answers 2

0

Added to this, there was the administrative practice in the 1980s and 1990s of reclassifying the unemployed as incapacitated, thereby reducing the unemployment claimant count. This practice was followed particularly rigorously in some of the areas with the highest unemployment rates.

From the para you have given, it is clear that the government just reclassified "unemployed" as "incapacitated". Thus, there would be no clear way to find the number of people actually unemployed, as they would be labeled as incapacitated. Thus, the statistics would be more inaccurate.

Two other things hint to the point C)

There are two main hypotheses to explain the differences we found in the self rated health....

Meaning that inaccuracies were found in the statistics. Also, later in the text it is mentioned that

These factors may have resulted in a healthier profile for the 'officially' unemployed in the area.

This line hints that the profile was altered 'officially' which is just euphemism for saying that the results would obviously be better.

3
  • +1. Thanks. You wrote 'it is clear that the government only reclassified "unemployed"'. What's the purpose of only? Does it matter if other statuses were reclassified as 'incapacitated'?
    – user8712
    Commented Sep 19, 2014 at 9:51
  • Will you please to respond in your answer, and not as a comment?
    – user8712
    Commented Sep 19, 2014 at 9:52
  • @LePressentiment - I've edited it a bit to express what I meant to say....
    – Stark07
    Commented Sep 19, 2014 at 10:11
0

The paragraph is talking about how people are classified in government statistics. It's all about government statistics. So assuming that the people reclassified from "unemployed" to "incapacitated" really are not incapacitated and this is a fiction and a trick to make the number of unemployed look smaller -- and thus presumably to make it look like government efforts to reduce unemployment have been more successful than they really are -- this would be deliberately making government statistics inaccurate.

I don't see how this is a question about the English language though. This is a question about economics and politics.