|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 18
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
1000 CR - confusing pls help [#permalink]
 26 Sep 2007, 09:57
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
Pls help me out in deciphering this challenging question
Some observers have concluded that the rise in the price of pepper means that the switch by some growers from pepper to cocoa left those growers no better off than if none of them had switched; this conclusion, however, is unwarranted because it can be inferred to be likely that
(A) those growers could not have foreseen how high the price of pepper would go
(B) the initial cost involved in switching from pepper to cocoa is substantial
(C) supplies of pepper would not be as low as they are if those growers had not switched crops
(D) cocoa crops are as susceptible to being reduced by bad weather as are pepper crops
(E) as more growers turn to growing cocoa, cocoa supplies will increase and the price of cocoa will fall precipitously
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 536
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
14
[0], given: 0
|
C...supply and price..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 18 Jun 2007
Posts: 55
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
(A) those growers could not have foreseen how high the price of pepper would go
The price of pepper is already mentioned, we can't use outside knowledge. If the they knew that the price of pepper was going up, then they would have stayed and made more money.
The price of pepper seems to have been lower than that of cocoa, which might explain why farmers switched to cocoa (the higher priced good). They mustn't have known that pepper would rise, if they did they probably wouldn't have switched.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
