One feature of the global food economy is the simultaneous import and

Clearly (A)

(A) - CORRECT. If establishing trade ties enables access to better goods produced abroad, this itself is basis enough to trade
(B) - Out of scope. Not mentioned.
(C) - Applicable just to cherries and not in general. Not the right choice.
(D) - This opposes the conclusion rather than supporting it. Incorrect.
(E) - No economic impact. Out of scope.

don't understand the link between one specific company and possibility to buy different goods. For ex if the company trade shoes wtf this company will need relationships concerning other goods?

Key to answering this question is to find which answer choice talks about ECONOMIC SENSE.

A) Establishing international ties through trade facilitates access to other desired goods that are more efficiently produced abroad. CORRECT
b) Undertaking free trade with one’s political allies helps to maintain international goodwill. NO ECONOMIC SENSE.
c) In recent years, consumers in California boycotted domestic cherries, demanding better working conditions for agricultural laborers in the state. NO ECONOMIC SENSE.
d) Local growers could sell their products at a premium in domestic markets. NO ECONOMIC SENSE and weakens the argument by saying that redundant trade is bad economic sense.
e) The economic globalization of redundant trade allows for the sharing of cultural norms and
values. NO ECONOMIC SENSE, instead talks only about CULTURAL EXCHANGE. Probably a good politician but not a businessman

Its A.

Analysis :- (Premise) redundant trade is one feature of global food economy. Its example is california imported x numbers of cherries from chile, italy, and germany while at the same time it exported nearly equal numbers of cherries - produced by it own - to canada and japan. The same thing happen with lettuce and almonds as well. (Counter Premise) exporting food products is an expensive undertaking, However (Conclusion) there is a justifiable rational for redundant trade.

Clearly we need to find that rational which encourages redundant trade. Any choice that focuses on other aspects of this practice such as price difference, quality difference in imported/exported products, consumers choices, social factors, political/diplomatic requirement would support the conclusion.

A) Correct. This choice states that such trade helps the government to establish international ties and with that it can have access to the commodities that are more efficiently produced in other countries. So this trade can be a political/diplomatic requirement.

B) we are discussing redundant trade and not free trade.

C) This is a shell game answer. The consumers' boycott may be the reason for importing cherries, but what about lettuce and almonds? We want to know the rational behind redundant trade taking place everywhere. Consumers' boycott may only be the reason for such trade taking in california but it cant for trade taking place at other places/countries (NOTE that the stimulus is discussing global food economy, not that of california alone)

D) This choice weakens the argument

E) I am confused with this choice. Although I don’t find any strong reason to eliminate this, I will not go with it as long as Choice A is there. Because choice A provides the Monetary reason while this choice provides cultural reason.

Regards,

Abhijit.

I would just like to put a point why 'C' must be wrong option

C -In recent years, consumers in California boycotted domestic cherries, demanding better working conditions for agricultural laborers in the state.

"In California, for example, domestic cherries are exported to Canada and Japan,
while a nearly equivalent number of cherries are imported from Chile, Italy, and Germany." This is mentioned in the Question.

If people Boycott cherries then why would they import them from other countries..?

One might say they are boycotting domestic cherries for improving Labour conditions and hence are purchasing imported cherries, but that any way doesn't solve the cause why people abandon cherries.

Coming to the point raised on the economic gain of making money from cherries rather than wasting the produce - we are not talking about a particular year's produce when people started boycotting, rather both boycotting and production continued for few years - "In recent years, consumers in California boycotted domestic cherries,"

If we talk about the gains regarding improving labour conditions - this might not be an economic gain and not a rationale definitely for economic gain as was already explained above..!

I am sure you got this by now, but just to make it clear to someone who read this discussion.

This is a strengthen question. In strengthen questions,we are looking for an answer that will echo the stimulus and personalize it. You want to stay broad, and not get too specific, but at the same time, address the underlying issue. In this problem, we are looking for an answer that will justifies the economic trade.


One feature of the global food economy is the simultaneous import and export of the same items, a phenomenon known as “redundant trade.” In California, for example, domestic cherries are exported to Canada and Japan, while a nearly equivalent number of cherries are imported from Chile, Italy, and Germany. California also exports and imports nearly identical amounts of lettuce and almonds. Although shipping fresh fruits and vegetables is an expensive undertaking, there is a justifiable economic rationale for redundant trade.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the conclusion above?

A) Establishing international ties through trade facilitates access to other desired goods that are more efficiently produced abroad. Sounds promising. Identifies the conclusion -which is to addresses why economic trade makes sense- (some countries produce better goods than others, even if they are trading the same goods. )
b) Undertaking free trade with one’s political allies helps to maintain international goodwill. Out of scope. Does not address economic trade benefits.
c) In recent years, consumers in California boycotted domestic cherries, demanding better working conditions for agricultural laborers in the state. way too extreme and specific. The stimulus mentions import and export between several countries- this option only explains California's redundant trading.
d) Local growers could sell their products at a premium in domestic markets. Out of scope. Weakens the argument.
e) The economic globalization of redundant trade allows for the sharing of cultural norms and values. Out of scope. Does address a benefit of redundant economic trading, but sharing cultural norms and values can be achieved several ways- not only through trade. Therefore, E does not address the conclusion.

Hope that helps!

Why D is wrong ?
Exporting a surplus product, a nation can reduce product's percentage availability among imported products and such practice allows local growers to fetch above wholesale price for that product in the market. Even in India it happens that we export most of the good quality tea to other countries at good price and growers sell whatever remains in the local market at a competitive price equivalent to the price other imported tea.

Usually exporters export those items for which they can fetch good price in other country and import anything which can get good price in domestic market... Further option A is referring to some complex phenomenon rather than profit or loss.. which directly governs the direction of trade.

I think D is far much appropriate than A.

A) Establishing international ties through trade facilitates access to other desired goods that are more efficiently produced abroad.

if redundant-trade had been mentioned instead of just trade then it could have been nearest to the OA.
International ties can be established with normal trade as well. Thus, i think A is not better than D.

One feature of the global food economy is the simultaneous import and export of the same items, a phenomenon known as “redundant trade.” In California, for example, domestic cherries are exported to Canada and Japan, while a nearly equivalent number of cherries are imported from Chile, Italy, and Germany. California also exports and imports nearly identical amounts of lettuce and almonds. Although shipping fresh fruits and vegetables is an expensive undertaking, there is a justifiable economic rationale for redundant trade.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the conclusion above?

A) Establishing international ties through trade facilitates access to other desired goods that are more efficiently produced abroad. - This choice explains that redundant trade allows for easier access to other desired goods that are more efficiently produced abroad. This is an explicitly economic rationale for redundant trade
b) Undertaking free trade with one’s political allies helps to maintain international goodwill. - This choice offers a political rather than an economic rationale for redundant trade.
c) In recent years, consumers in California boycotted domestic cherries, demanding better working conditions for agricultural laborers in the state. - Irrelevant
d) Local growers could sell their products at a premium in domestic markets. - weakens
e) The economic globalization of redundant trade allows for the sharing of cultural norms and values. - This choice offers a cultural rather than an economic rationale for redundant
trade.

Answer A

A) Establishing international ties through trade facilitates access to other desired goods that are more efficiently produced abroad.

The argument clearly talks about the lobal food economy and redundant trade,The answer choice provided convincing reason for doing redundant trade by mainitaing trade relation and to acqurie goods that are made more efficiently abroud through the trade relations.

b) Undertaking free trade with one’s political allies helps to maintain international goodwill.

thepolitical allies and interbnational goodwill s not described in the argument.

c) In recent years, consumers in California boycotted domestic cherries, demanding better working conditions for agricultural laborers in the state.
The choice only talks about cherries and not the other goods whereas the trade of many goods are taking place and thus is not a good answer.

d) Local growers could sell their products at a premium in domestic markets.
there is no mention ofthe local growers and their selling prices.

e) The economic globalization of redundant trade allows for the sharing of cultural norms and
values.

the cultureal norm and values are not the subject of the discussion in the argument.

One feature of the global food economy is the simultaneous import and export of the same items, a phenomenon
known as “redundant trade.” In California, for example, domestic cherries are exported to Canada and Japan,
while a nearly equivalent number of cherries are imported from Chile, Italy, and Germany. California also exports
and imports nearly identical amounts of lettuce and almonds. Although shipping fresh fruits and vegetables is an
expensive undertaking, there is a justifiable economic rationale for redundant trade.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the conclusion above?

• Establishing international ties through trade facilitates access to other desired goods that are more efficiently produced abroad.
The point provides reason why the redundant trade takes place and thus supports the argument by explaining the reason why it happens.
• Undertaking free trade with one’s political allies helps to maintain international goodwill.
• In recent years, consumers in California boycotted domestic cherries, demanding better working conditions for agricultural laborers in the state.
• Local growers could sell their products at a premium in domestic markets.
• The economic globalization of redundant trade allows for the sharing of cultural norms and values.

Fell for trap choice C. My major learning throughout practicing strengthen questions has been this - DO NOT OVERTHINK the options, as many folks have pointed out. Make a framework for strengthen questions and use it. I also realized overthinking is desirable for many assumption type questions, but strengthen are quite straight forward and many times the correct options are rephrased conclusions or combination of premises. Big sigh

So, there are couple of examples of a phenomenon and a conclusion that there is some reason to continue redundant trade, which may be good economically.
We need to support this conclusion,

B. Maintaining international goodwill does not really help us financially.
C. somewhat weakens the argument, if country continuing redundant trade cannot ensure better working conditions (with certain assumptions) it may not be useful for economy.
D. Weakens, if farmers can earn more profit domestically then why is international trade reqd. at all
E. Cultural exchange cannot ensure economic benefits.

A. Establishing international ties through trade facilitates access to other desired goods that are more efficiently produced abroad. = For e.g. computer chips produced in US cost $20 but the same computer chips produced in China with same quality costs $10 and are exported with tariffs to US say at $15, this will still be beneficial for US.

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.