|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 13 Jul 2011
Posts: 12
Location: Turkey
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 1
|
Re: CR - Assumption 700 level - tariffs [#permalink]
 28 Jul 2011, 06:58
IMO A.
A directly attacks the assumption that in equal conditions (better than current situation), X can compete with Y and sell more cars than it currently does in Y.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 11 Apr 2011
Posts: 273
Followers: 18
Kudos [?]:
112
[0], given: 13
|
Re: CR - Assumption 700 level - tariffs [#permalink]
28 Jul 2011, 07:04
goktug26 wrote: IMO A.
A directly attacks the assumption that in equal conditions (better than current situation), X can compete with Y and sell more cars than it currently does in Y. I think this strengthens the argument.
_________________
Powerscore CR Bible Full Chapter Notes | Easily Extend Vocabulary List with Google Dictionary
Please kudo me if you found my post useful. Thanks!!! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 13 Jul 2011
Posts: 12
Location: Turkey
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 1
|
Re: CR - Assumption 700 level - tariffs [#permalink]
28 Jul 2011, 07:09
Mahtab wrote: goktug26 wrote: IMO A.
A directly attacks the assumption that in equal conditions (better than current situation), X can compete with Y and sell more cars than it currently does in Y. I think this strengthens the argument. A does not strengthen because it gives an example to a market, where Country X and Y are treated equally, and where Y still sells more than X. So, X's assumption that they will sell more in Y when the barrier is lower, is ruined.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 11 Apr 2011
Posts: 273
Followers: 18
Kudos [?]:
112
[0], given: 13
|
Re: CR - Assumption 700 level - tariffs [#permalink]
28 Jul 2011, 07:20
From the argument, we can create an example. Country X's tariff is 10% whereas Country Y's tariff is 20%. When you talk about the 'barrier', you mean the 'equal tariffs on goods'. So if they have equal tariff in other places...Equal tariff could mean 20% for both countries then obviously Country Y would sell more. If equal tariff is 10%, then Country X would be more competitive. So IMO...I don't think this weakens the argument.
_________________
Powerscore CR Bible Full Chapter Notes | Easily Extend Vocabulary List with Google Dictionary
Please kudo me if you found my post useful. Thanks!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 13 Jul 2011
Posts: 12
Location: Turkey
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 1
|
Re: CR - Assumption 700 level - tariffs [#permalink]
28 Jul 2011, 07:27
Mahtab wrote: From the argument, we can create an example. Country X's tariff is 10% whereas Country Y's tariff is 20%. When you talk about the 'barrier', you mean the 'equal tariffs on goods'. So if they have equal tariff in other places...Equal tariff could mean 20% for both countries then obviously Country Y would sell more. If equal tariff is 10%, then Country X would be more competitive.
So IMO...I don't think this weakens the argument. Z is a market, where X and Y are equally treated, same tariffs, same difficulties for both. But even in this market, X can not compete with Y. So, the real reason is not the high tariffs, and Country X will not be necessarily succesfull in Country Y when the tariffs are reduced in Y.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 11 Apr 2011
Posts: 273
Followers: 18
Kudos [?]:
112
[0], given: 13
|
Re: CR - Assumption 700 level - tariffs [#permalink]
28 Jul 2011, 07:45
You are right. I was overthinking a bit too much haha. OA is A.
_________________
Powerscore CR Bible Full Chapter Notes | Easily Extend Vocabulary List with Google Dictionary
Please kudo me if you found my post useful. Thanks!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 04 Jul 2011
Posts: 24
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
9
[0], given: 4
|
Re: CR - Assumption 700 level - tariffs [#permalink]
28 Jul 2011, 08:27
This has got to be a Kaplan or PR question and not a real question. It's poorly formed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 21 May 2011
Posts: 249
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
44
[0], given: 8
|
Re: CR - Assumption 700 level - tariffs [#permalink]
28 Jul 2011, 14:24
This is a classic causal argument. The assumption here is that cars for country X cannot sell as well as cars from country Y because of the high import tariffs imposed by country Y. If we can find an alternate cause for poor sales of cars from country X then we are golden.
A fits the bill beautifully. When the tariffs are same, there must be something else that is causing the declining sales from country X.
A is the answer.
C is a trap answer. It in fact strengthens the authors argument. Just like how cars from X are sold less because of high tax subsidies in Y, cars from Y are sold less because of high tax subsidies in other countries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 10 Jan 2011
Posts: 238
Location: India
GMAT Date: 07-16-2012
GPA: 3.4
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
24
[0], given: 20
|
Re: CR - Assumption 700 level - tariffs [#permalink]
06 Sep 2011, 06:24
IMO A
_________________
-------Analyze why option A in SC wrong-------
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 15 Nov 2010
Posts: 109
Followers: 4
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 15
|
Re: CR-High Tarriffs [#permalink]
07 Sep 2011, 19:41
jallenmorris wrote: Here is the OE from the Kaplan book: Choice (A) is correct. Find the author's conclusion and evidence, and the assumption linking them. Weaken the argument by invalidating that assumption. The argument develops from evidence that Y's high tariffs make X's cars relatively expensive, but X's low tariffs make Y's car relatively cheap. The arguemnt concludes that if Y lowers its tariffs, then real competition and an equitable balance of trade would result. Country X assumes htat Y sells mroe cars in X than X sells in Y because of the price difference created by the different tariffs. This suggests a classic case of ignored alternatives. Look for a choice that suggests that there might be an alternative explanation besides the difference in tariffs that could explain the weakness of x's car sales relative to Y's. (A) weakens country X's argument by illustrating that the effect (more Y cars sold than X cars) is possible without the supposed cause (a tariff imbalance favoring y). This implies that something other than tariffs--the rason offered by X for its poor performance in the car market--could very well explain the differnce in sales (maybe X's car plain stinks). Thanks for the explanation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: CR-High Tarriffs
[#permalink]
07 Sep 2011, 19:41
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Vercules, Legendaddy, noboru, Marcab, metallicafan, rajeevrks27, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, souvik101990, doe007, MacFauz, PTK, carcass, kissthegmat, Narenn
|
close
