Wednesday, December 11, 2019
08:42 AM (GMT +5)

Go Back   CSS Forums > CSS Past Papers > CSS 2018 Papers

Reply Share Thread: Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook     Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter     Submit Thread to Google+ Google+    
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #81  
Old Wednesday, January 30, 2019
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 60
Thanks: 45
Thanked 64 Times in 29 Posts
dr anum rashid is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AamirLKR View Post
It was very easy.
Ans A. all expenditure=100% then, others=100-15-8-10-26-15-10. So its answer was 16%

Ans B. utilities=8/100=.08, rent=26/100=.26, food=15/100=.15

Ans C. As expenditure is 8% then, 11600*100/8=145000.

Ans D. expenditure on others in 24000 income is 24000*16/100=3840. now others include three things one is saving which ratio is 3/8. So Saving will be 3840*3/8=1440.


I have a lil bit of confusion in this part of question. Can you please help me with it. We have to calculate savings from 'other' expenditure not from the monthly income 24000. I get that, but from the pie chart in the figure we know that 'other' represents 16% of total expenditure. Which is Rs.145000, not 16% of monthly income i.e 24000. Then why are we calculating 'other' expenses as 16/100*24000? Why not 16/100*145000? What if the figure 24000 in the statement is misleading?

If we assume 16% of 24000, that would disturb the whole pie chart and figures won't add up. I need urgent help with this question. Anyone please?
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to dr anum rashid For This Useful Post:
Masood Ehsan Bhatti (Wednesday, January 30, 2019)
  #82  
Old Wednesday, January 30, 2019
A New Beginning's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Islamabad
Posts: 90
Thanks: 36
Thanked 41 Times in 28 Posts
A New Beginning is on a distinguished road
Default

I think we have to treat part C and D separately. It's just the pie chart that's common. Plus, if you see the "others" section consists of "savings", so savings can't be considered as a form of expenditure. Hence we can safely apply the ratios of the chart to the income directly in part D too. and the answers come out 1440.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to A New Beginning For This Useful Post:
Masood Ehsan Bhatti (Wednesday, January 30, 2019)
  #83  
Old Wednesday, January 30, 2019
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 60
Thanks: 45
Thanked 64 Times in 29 Posts
dr anum rashid is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A New Beginning View Post
I think we have to treat part C and D separately. It's just the pie chart that's common. Plus, if you see the "others" section consists of "savings", so savings can't be considered as a form of expenditure. Hence we can safely apply the ratios of the chart to the income directly in part D too. and the answers come out 1440.

But we can't treat C and D separately. Because C & D on their own don't give us the whole information required to calculate the questions asked in C and D part.
For example, in C part we are given the utilities expenditure (11600) only, and are asked to calculate the total expenditure. Total expenditure that represents the whole pie chart. For calculating that we need value 8/100 from the pie chart. So this part is not independent of the pie chart. P.s the amount of total expenditure 145000 (calculated in the C part) matches up with the pie chart. You calculate any expenditure out of 145000, you get the exact same %age value given in the pie chart. This part is fine.

Now for the D part we are only given the breakup of 'other' in ratio 3:4:1. To calculate 'other' we have to go back to the pie chart to get the 16% value of other, so we could calculate savings from 'other'. Hence this part is not independent of the pie chart either. Now if we are taking 16% from the pie chart_which represents 16% of 145000 ((total expenditure) and not 16% of income_ why are we not calculating it accordingly in the D part, that is 16/100* 145000 ? Because in that case figure would match up with the given pie chart.
Can't it be that 24000 is just given as distraction?
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old Wednesday, January 30, 2019
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 60
Thanks: 45
Thanked 64 Times in 29 Posts
dr anum rashid is on a distinguished road
Default

I have solved many questions on pie chart. All are asked in 4-5 parts according to the information given in the pie chart. No matter what are you calculating and by what method, at the end all the calculated figures in all parts match up with the information given in the pie chart. This the only exception, i have seen here in the D part of this question. That is, you calculate 'other' out of 24000 and disturb the whole pie chart. The figures don't add up. Hence the confusion. Is there any way to confirm that the answer calculated out of 24000 in this thread is the correct answer?
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old Wednesday, January 30, 2019
A New Beginning's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Islamabad
Posts: 90
Thanks: 36
Thanked 41 Times in 28 Posts
A New Beginning is on a distinguished road
Default

If the income is 24000 how can the expenditure be 1,45,000 (unless IMF is very lenient on this particular family) . If 24000 is the income then the percentages apply as they are. And the only thing the examiner is checking here, in my opinion, is the application of .16 x 3/8 x (whatever is the value regardless). So shouldn't worry much on this part and simply solve it on the face value of 24,000 income, which is expressly mentioned.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old Wednesday, January 30, 2019
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 60
Thanks: 45
Thanked 64 Times in 29 Posts
dr anum rashid is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A New Beginning View Post
If the income is 24000 how can the expenditure be 1,45,000 (unless IMF is very lenient on this particular family) . If 24000 is the income then the percentages apply as they are. And the only thing the examiner is checking here, in my opinion, is the application of .16 x 3/8 x (whatever is the value regardless). So shouldn't worry much on this part and simply solve it on the face value of 24,000 income, which is expressly mentioned.
Exactly my pont. And hence the source of my confusion. If monthly expenditure is 145000, how come the income can be 24000? Expenditure is 145000,we know that for sure. We have calculated that in part C. P.s you can also varify the figure 145000 by this pie chart. Which the statement says represents monthly expenditure.

8% of 145000 gives 11600= utilities
10% of 145000 gives 14500=local tax
26% of 145000 gives 37700= rent
15% of 145000 gives 21750= childcare
10% of 145000 gives 14500= travel
16%of 145000 gives 23200= other
15% of 145000 gives 217500= food

Add them all up; you get 145000, and your expenditure is varified as per this pie chart. So, how they gave the figure of 24000 for monthly income? Which doesn't fit anywhere in this pie chart. That's why i doubted that this figure could be misleading.
If i had been solving it in the exam hall, i also would have done it out of 24000. But that makes no sense. As in part D, they are asking you to calculate savings portion from 'other'. 'other' s value you have to get from the pie chart (16%). Which refers 16% of expenditure. But all of a sudden in part D. You are calculating 16% of income instead of expenditure.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to dr anum rashid For This Useful Post:
Masood Ehsan Bhatti (Wednesday, January 30, 2019), OkIFeelBetterNow (2 Weeks Ago)
  #87  
Old Wednesday, January 30, 2019
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 60
Thanks: 45
Thanked 64 Times in 29 Posts
dr anum rashid is on a distinguished road
Default

They have disturbed the beauty of Maths in this question �� which lies in the very fact that whatever way you calculate the figures, they all add up ultimately as a whole without any discrepancy. I guess i'm done protesting here. ��. If in the exam hall i would also calculate it out of 24000, since the examiner is also likely to go with the popular opinion and i would prefer marks over keeping the beauty of maths intact.��
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old Monday, September 02, 2019
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Gujranwala
Posts: 1
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
ahmednoor is on a distinguished road
Default Question combination

Salamm,
plz confirm that is this compulsory to attempt 2,2 questions from both part or can i attempt a 3, 1 combination??
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 2 Weeks Ago
OkIFeelBetterNow's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Outer Space
Posts: 10
Thanks: 20
Thanked 5 Times in 2 Posts
OkIFeelBetterNow is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniyal88 View Post
Most people at my centre also answered “9,000” for D which I think is wrong. Even the person who was masters in math. 1,440 is the right answer probably. Because you have to calculate ratio from ‘others’’ perspective. Not directly from 24,000.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't think 1440 is the right answer either. 16% was to be calculated of the total expenditure, not the income.
So 16% of 145,000 makes 21200, which when applied in ratio gives an answer of 1200.
__________________
If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything ~ Malcom X
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
new PMS syllabus for new pattern ishti ahmad PCS / PMS 8 Tuesday, July 23, 2019 03:18 PM
Asma Jilani ---- Vs---- Govt. of the Punjab sajidnuml Constitutional Law 5 Saturday, November 11, 2017 06:00 PM
History of Presidentship in Pakistan Naseer Ahmed Chandio General Knowledge, Quizzes, IQ Tests 1 Tuesday, May 31, 2011 04:00 PM


CSS Forum on Facebook Follow CSS Forum on Twitter

Disclaimer: All messages made available as part of this discussion group (including any bulletin boards and chat rooms) and any opinions, advice, statements or other information contained in any messages posted or transmitted by any third party are the responsibility of the author of that message and not of CSSForum.com.pk (unless CSSForum.com.pk is specifically identified as the author of the message). The fact that a particular message is posted on or transmitted using this web site does not mean that CSSForum has endorsed that message in any way or verified the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message. We encourage visitors to the forum to report any objectionable message in site feedback. This forum is not monitored 24/7.

Sponsors: ArgusVision   vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.