The state with the lowest percent of income per tax household derived from sources other than wages, salaries, dividends, and interest has an income per capita of more than $20,000.
Data:
State Population | Size of tax household | Average income per tax household ($)| % wages | % dividends & interest
Texas | 25,145,561 | 2.58 | 51,747 | 76.8%| 4.4%
Explanation:
Here, you need to deal with a derived number: the percent of income derived from sources other than those listed (wages, salaries, dividends, and interest). If you had Excel and could build another column, you would add the two percent columns that you do have and subtract them from 100%. Then you would sort by that new column. You want the lowest number in that column, so you want the highest sum of the two percents. Since the wage numbers seem to have more variability, sort by that column. Texas is at the bottom, with 76.8% wage income. Together with 4.4% dividends & interest, you get 81.2% (for 18.8% other income). Will any other states give you a higher sum? As you scan upwards, you should see that no other state will have as large a sum of % wages and % dividends & interest (of course, check any possibilities with your calculator). So Texas is the subject of the sentence.
What about the predicate? Does Texas have an income per capita (meaning per person) of more than $20,000? Well, divide the income per tax household by the size of tax household: $51,747 / 2.58 ≈ $20,057, which is more than $20,000. The statement is true.
My Question:
1.) an income per capita : means per person
so i think it should be divided by total population?
2.) Average income per tax household ($) : how can in the explanation it can be divided again by 2.58? ==> income per tax household / household? it doesn't seem correct? please clarify
How i Did?
==> 51,747 * (100- 81.2)/100 * 2.58 / 25,145,561.
Thanks in anticipation.
-Sushil