Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

 It is currently 24 May 2016, 08:50

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# A severe drought can actually lessen the total amount of

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 12 Oct 2003
Posts: 261
Location: sydney
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 0

A severe drought can actually lessen the total amount of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Apr 2004, 08:53
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

4.A severe drought can actually lessen the total amount of government aid that United States farmers receive as a group. The government pays farmers the amount,if any, by which the market price at which crops are actually sold falls short of a preset target price per bushel for the crops. The drought of 1983, for example, caused farm-program payments to drop by $10 billion. Given the information above, which of the following, if true, best explains why the drought of 1983 resulted in a reduction in farm-program payments? (A) Prior to the drought of 1983, the government raised the target price for crops in order to aid farmers in reducing their debt loads. (B) Due to the drought of 1983, United States farmers exported less food in 1983 than in the preceding year. (C) Due to the drought of 1983, United States farmers had smaller harvests and thus received a higher market price for the 1983 crop than for the larger crop of the preceding year. (D) Due to the drought of 1983 , United States farmers planned to plant smaller crops in 1984 than they had in 1983. (E) Despite the drought of 1983, retail prices for food did not increase significantly between 1982 and 1983. A and C are contenders. Pls explain your answer. _________________ When u r about to make ends meet, someone moves the ends. SVP Joined: 30 Oct 2003 Posts: 1793 Location: NewJersey USA Followers: 5 Kudos [?]: 66 [0], given: 0 [#permalink] ### Show Tags 15 Apr 2004, 09:19 It has to be C. If the harvest is low then the demand for the products shootsup nearing the target price set by the government. Hence government will pay less to the farmers to compensate the difference in the selling price and the target price. Senior Manager Joined: 02 Mar 2004 Posts: 327 Location: There Followers: 1 Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0 [#permalink] ### Show Tags 15 Apr 2004, 09:23 target price - real price = minimum. Thanks to drought, price goes up, hence the differential decreases. Answer is A. Intern Joined: 08 Apr 2004 Posts: 37 Location: San Fran Followers: 0 Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0 [#permalink] ### Show Tags 15 Apr 2004, 09:26 C) The government decides price like this . Aid Paid = (PresetValue - Market Value). If Market value increases then aid Paid will actually decrease. During a drought the price per bushel actually increases (lower production) so aid paid is less. Manager Joined: 16 Oct 2003 Posts: 154 Location: India Followers: 1 Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0 [#permalink] ### Show Tags 15 Apr 2004, 09:54 I agree with Version2. It has to be C. _________________ A 750 aspirant. GMAT Club Legend Joined: 15 Dec 2003 Posts: 4302 Followers: 33 Kudos [?]: 318 [0], given: 0 [#permalink] ### Show Tags 15 Apr 2004, 14:18 Let's say the target price prior to 1983 was 40$ and the market price was 30$. This means that farmers are short 10$ and the government will provide them with subsidy to cover for the shortfall. A says that the target was increased, say to 50$. This means that the subsidy should have been increased because the shortfall will be now 20$. Yet, the stem says that the subsidy was reduced by \$10B despite the increase in the target price. A clearly does not resolve the paradox
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

[#permalink] 15 Apr 2004, 14:18
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
3 Government restrictions have severely limited the amount of 35 28 Apr 2012, 19:50
11 A severe drought can actually lessen the total amount of 11 12 Jan 2012, 03:12
1 A severe drought can actually lessen the total amount of 13 02 Jan 2011, 16:45
A severe drought can actually lessen the total amount of 2 12 May 2010, 06:11
1 A severe drought can actually lessen the total amount of 6 04 Dec 2009, 08:15
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# A severe drought can actually lessen the total amount of

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.