Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

Answer the question based on the information given below: Country Population (crores) China 138.2 India 132.6 U.S. 32.4 Pakistan 19.8 Japan 12.6 Russia 14.3   How much percentage less than the population of Russia is the Japan's population approximately?

Answer the question based on the information given below: Country Population (crores) China 138.2 India 132.6 U.S. 32.4 Pakistan 19.8 Japan 12.6 Russia 14.3   How much percentage less than the population of Russia is the Japan's population approximately? Correct Answer 12%

Given:
 

Country

Population (crores)

China

138.2

India

132.6

U.S.

32.4

Pakistan

19.8

Japan

12.6

Russia

14.3

Calculation:

The population of Russia = 14.3 crores

The population of Japan = 12.6 crores

Difference = 1.7 crores

Percentage by which Japan's population is less than Russia's population = (14.3 - 12.6)/14.3 × 100 = 

⇒ 11.88 % ≈ 12 %.

∴  The population of Japan is approximately 12 % less than that of Russia.

Related Questions

Read the passage and answer the questions that follow. Unsurprisingly, the latest conviction comes a month after the FATF, a global dirty money watchdog, urged Pakistan to complete an internationally agreed action plan to fight terror financing. In February 2018, Pakistan endorsed a UN list of terrorist organizations operating in the country and enforced a nationwide ban on them, including the LeT and the JuD, just before a meeting of the FATF. But the FATF still placed Pakistan on its “grey list” in June 2018, and demanded more actions from Islamabad to avoid being blacklisted, which could invite economic sanctions. Ever since, Pakistan, which cannot afford to be blacklisted, especially when its economy is in shambles, has moved against Saeed. The Anti-Terrorism Department’s FIRs against Saeed and his aides accuse the JuD of financing terrorism from its fund collections in the name of charity through NGOs. While the authorities’ move against Saeed is welcome, the question is whether these are genuine attempts to fight terrorism or half-hearted measures to dodge international pressure. There are doubts because Pakistan had used anti-India and anti-Afghan terrorist networks for strategic advantages. It was this dual policy of fighting terror at home while nurturing terror groups that target its rivals abroad that has been responsible for Pakistan’s predicament. If it is serious about fighting terrorism, Pakistan should crackdown on terror financing and terror infrastructure. The international community and organizations, including the FATF, should keep up the pressure until Islamabad shows tangible outcomes. According to the passage, why FATF did not remove Pakistan from the "grey list"?
A statement is given followed by three inferences numbered I, II, and III. Consider the statement to be true even if it is at variance with commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the inferences, if any, follow from the given statement. Statement: Japan will open up its doors to about two lakh IT professionals from India, and issue green cards to settle down in Japan and support the country's rapidly expanding IT infrastructure, said Shigeki Maeda, Executive Vice President at Japan External Trade Organisation (JETRO), a government body. Inferences: I. There is a dearth of IT professionals in Japan. II. IT professionals from India are way more talented and hardworking than professionals from other countries. III. Japans IT industry is growing by leaps and bounds every year.
Read the passage and answer the questions that follow. Unsurprisingly, the latest conviction comes a month after the FATF, a global dirty money watchdog, urged Pakistan to complete an internationally agreed action plan to fight terror financing. In February 2018, Pakistan endorsed a UN list of terrorist organizations operating in the country and enforced a nationwide ban on them, including the LeT and the JuD, just before a meeting of the FATF. But the FATF still placed Pakistan on its “grey list” in June 2018, and demanded more actions from Islamabad to avoid being blacklisted, which could invite economic sanctions. Ever since, Pakistan, which cannot afford to be blacklisted, especially when its economy is in shambles, has moved against Saeed. The Anti-Terrorism Department’s FIRs against Saeed and his aides accuse the JuD of financing terrorism from its fund collections in the name of charity through NGOs. While the authorities’ move against Saeed is welcome, the question is whether these are genuine attempts to fight terrorism or half-hearted measures to dodge international pressure. There are doubts because Pakistan had used anti-India and anti-Afghan terrorist networks for strategic advantages. It was this dual policy of fighting terror at home while nurturing terror groups that target its rivals abroad that has been responsible for Pakistan’s predicament. If it is serious about fighting terrorism, Pakistan should crackdown on terror financing and terror infrastructure. The international community and organizations, including the FATF, should keep up the pressure until Islamabad shows tangible outcomes. From the passage, it can be inferred that the author is:
Read the passage and answer the questions that follow. Unsurprisingly, the latest conviction comes a month after the FATF, a global dirty money watchdog, urged Pakistan to complete an internationally agreed action plan to fight terror financing. In February 2018, Pakistan endorsed a UN list of terrorist organizations operating in the country and enforced a nationwide ban on them, including the LeT and the JuD, just before a meeting of the FATF. But the FATF still placed Pakistan on its “grey list” in June 2018, and demanded more actions from Islamabad to avoid being blacklisted, which could invite economic sanctions. Ever since, Pakistan, which cannot afford to be blacklisted, especially when its economy is in shambles, has moved against Saeed. The Anti-Terrorism Department’s FIRs against Saeed and his aides accuse the JuD of financing terrorism from its fund collections in the name of charity through NGOs. While the authorities’ move against Saeed is welcome, the question is whether these are genuine attempts to fight terrorism or half-hearted measures to dodge international pressure. There are doubts because Pakistan had used anti-India and anti-Afghan terrorist networks for strategic advantages. It was this dual policy of fighting terror at home while nurturing terror groups that target its rivals abroad that has been responsible for Pakistan’s predicament. If it is serious about fighting terrorism, Pakistan should crackdown on terror financing and terror infrastructure. The international community and organizations, including the FATF, should keep up the pressure until Islamabad shows tangible outcomes. What is the meaning of the word SHAMBLES in the passage?
Read the passage and answer the questions that follow. Unsurprisingly, the latest conviction comes a month after the FATF, a global dirty money watchdog, urged Pakistan to complete an internationally agreed action plan to fight terror financing. In February 2018, Pakistan endorsed a UN list of terrorist organizations operating in the country and enforced a nationwide ban on them, including the LeT and the JuD, just before a meeting of the FATF. But the FATF still placed Pakistan on its “grey list” in June 2018, and demanded more actions from Islamabad to avoid being blacklisted, which could invite economic sanctions. Ever since, Pakistan, which cannot afford to be blacklisted, especially when its economy is in shambles, has moved against Saeed. The Anti-Terrorism Department’s FIRs against Saeed and his aides accuse the JuD of financing terrorism from its fund collections in the name of charity through NGOs. While the authorities’ move against Saeed is welcome, the question is whether these are genuine attempts to fight terrorism or half-hearted measures to dodge international pressure. There are doubts because Pakistan had used anti-India and anti-Afghan terrorist networks for strategic advantages. It was this dual policy of fighting terror at home while nurturing terror groups that target its rivals abroad that has been responsible for Pakistan’s predicament. If it is serious about fighting terrorism, Pakistan should crackdown on terror financing and terror infrastructure. The international community and organizations, including the FATF, should keep up the pressure until Islamabad shows tangible outcomes. The purpose of the author in writing this passage seems to be
Read the passage and answer the questions that follow. Unsurprisingly, the latest conviction comes a month after the FATF, a global dirty money watchdog, urged Pakistan to complete an internationally agreed action plan to fight terror financing. In February 2018, Pakistan endorsed a UN list of terrorist organizations operating in the country and enforced a nationwide ban on them, including the LeT and the JuD, just before a meeting of the FATF. But the FATF still placed Pakistan on its “grey list” in June 2018, and demanded more actions from Islamabad to avoid being blacklisted, which could invite economic sanctions. Ever since, Pakistan, which cannot afford to be blacklisted, especially when its economy is in shambles, has moved against Saeed. The Anti-Terrorism Department’s FIRs against Saeed and his aides accuse the JuD of financing terrorism from its fund collections in the name of charity through NGOs. While the authorities’ move against Saeed is welcome, the question is whether these are genuine attempts to fight terrorism or half-hearted measures to dodge international pressure. There are doubts because Pakistan had used anti-India and anti-Afghan terrorist networks for strategic advantages. It was this dual policy of fighting terror at home while nurturing terror groups that target its rivals abroad that has been responsible for Pakistan’s predicament. If it is serious about fighting terrorism, Pakistan should crackdown on terror financing and terror infrastructure. The international community and organizations, including the FATF, should keep up the pressure until Islamabad shows tangible outcomes. As per the passage, which word can replace CONVICTION grammatically and contextually?
Which one of the following four addresses is NOT EXACTLY the same as the one given below? Jennifer Stenvin 23/198 B, Walkswagen  malaviyen street Stempho guestur London i. Jennifer Stenvin 23/198 B, Walkswagon  malaviyen street Stempho guestur London ii. Jennifer Stenvin 23/198 B, Walkswagen  malaviyen street Stempho guestur London iii. Jennifer Stenvin 23/198 B, Walkswagen  malaviyen street Stempho guestur London iv. Jennifer Stenvin 23/198 B, Walkswagen  malaviyen street Stempho guestur London
Among the five international participants, Pakistan, Australia, England, India, and Bangladesh in a Cricket tournament, the score obtained by India is more than Australia and Pakistan. England‘s score is less than that of Australia but more than Pakistan. Bangladesh‘s score is more than Pakistan and England but less than that of Australia. Who scored the highest and the second-lowest among all the five participants?
From the given table, what is the percentage of students scoring 40 or more, but less than 70. Scores Less than 20 Less than 30 Less than 40 Less than 50 Less than 60 Less than 70 Less than 80 No. of Students 12 19 22 31 38 46 50
In a certain code language, if India is called China, China is called Japan, Japan is called Australia, Australia is called Pakistan, and Pakistan is called Ireland. So which is the smallest continent in the world?