The problem requires determining the ratio of savings for two individuals, A and B, given the ratios of their salaries and expenditures. We are provided with two statements and must assess their sufficiency.
1. Let's define the variables:
Let the salary of A be \(3x\) and the salary of B be \(4x\).
Their expenditures are in the ratio 4:5, so let A's expenditure be \(4y\) and B's expenditure be \(5y\).
2. We need to find the savings ratio for A and B, defined as savings = salary - expenditure.
3. Statement I: B's saving is 25% of his salary.
B's saving = \(0.25 \times 4x = 1x\).
B's expenditure = salary - saving = \(4x - 1x = 3x\).
Since B's expenditure relates to \(5y\), we have \(5y = 3x\) and can solve for \(y\) in terms of \(x\): \(y = \frac{3x}{5}\).
A's expenditure = \(4y = 4 \times \frac{3x}{5} = \frac{12x}{5}\).
A's saving = \(3x - \frac{12x}{5} = \frac{15x}{5} - \frac{12x}{5} = \frac{3x}{5}\).
The ratio of A's saving to B's saving is \(\frac{\frac{3x}{5}}{x} = \frac{3}{5}\).
Therefore, statement I is sufficient.
4. Statement II: B's salary is Rs. 2500.
If B's salary is Rs. 2500, we know \(4x = 2500\) or \(x = 625\), but without information on the percentage saved or additional details about A's salary, we can't determine savings ratio. Statement II alone is not sufficient.
5. Conclusion: Data in Statement I alone is sufficient to answer the question but the data in Statement II alone is not sufficient to answer the question.
Health insurance plays a vital role in ensuring financial protection and access to quality healthcare. In India, however, the extent and nature of health insurance coverage vary significantly between urban and rural areas. While urban populations often have better access to organized insurance schemes, employer-provided coverage, and awareness about health policies, rural populations face challenges such as limited outreach of insurance schemes, inadequate infrastructure, and lower awareness levels. This urban-rural divide in health insurance coverage highlights the broader issue of healthcare inequality, making it essential to analyze the factors contributing to this gap and explore strategies for more inclusive health protection. A state-level health survey was conducted.
The survey covered 1,80,000 adults across urban and rural areas. Urban residents formed 55% of the sample (that is, 99,000 people) while rural residents made up 45% (that is, 81,000 people). In each area, coverage was classified under four heads – Public schemes, Private insurance, Employer-provided coverage, and Uninsured. In urban areas, Public coverage accounted for 28% of the urban population, Private for 22%, Employer for 18%, and the remaining 32% were Uninsured. In rural areas, where formal coverage is generally lower, Public coverage stood at 35%, Private at 10%, Employer at 8%, while 47% were Uninsured.
For this survey, “Insured” includes everyone covered by Public + Private + Employer schemes, and “Uninsured” indicates those with no coverage at all. Officials noted that public schemes remain the backbone of rural coverage, while employer and private plans are relatively more prevalent in urban centres. (250 words)