1- U.S officials complain that the country's trade deficit

Question

1- U.S officials complain that the country's trade deficit with Japan is due to the fact that Japan's markets are not open enough to imports and investment. Japaneese officials reply that the U.S should concentrate on improving its school systems and investing more money in scientific research and worker training .

I found this answer to be out of scope or rather too simple to be accomidate as one....please let me know why the ans is actually so!

It can be infered that the Japnaeese officials hold which of the Opinions ?

A) The U. S should open its own markets, to more imports and investment.

B) The trade deficit between the U.S and Japan is more the result of poor Aamerican performance than Japan's import restrictions

C) The trade defict between the U.S and Japan is a result of Japan's closed markets

D) U.S school systems foster a mistrust of Japan that prevents U.S business people from negotiating intelliegently with Japan

E) Better education and worker training can help shrink the trade imbalance, but should not be counted on to close the gap entirely.

explain the ans!

2- statistics show that although consumption of low-calorie,alternative sweeteners has gone up in each of the past five years , so has the percentage of the population that is obese. Acoording to sugar manufacturers, this shows that low-calorie, alternative sweeteners are not effective weight loss aids.

Which of the following assertions if true, would most weaken the sugar manufacturers conclusion ?

A)Many people who use low-calorie , alternatives sweeteners eat some foods that are not low-calorie.

B)Some low - claorie , alternative sweeteners can Increase the appetite , making a person eat more than he or she normally would eat.

C)Many people use low-calorie, alternative sweeteners to accompany a wel- balanced low-calorie diet

D)Obesity has declined among people who have consistently used low-calorie alternative sweeteners

E) The rise in the consumption of low-calorie alternative sweeteners is primarily due to an increase in the number of users rather than an increase in the amount each user consumes.

answers will follow.....also negate the wrong options so that it can help others know how to get the non-relavnt answerz out.

Have fun

Archived Topic

Hi there,

This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.

Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Critical Reasoning (CR) Forum

Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.

Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!

Bhai · Answer

1. B
2. D

It can be inferred that the Japanese have closed doors to the poor quality of product and may be wrong style of investment. If they improve their quality of education, research and training which will help in making better products and services. And this will increase bilateral trade between the countries.

D does the maximum damage to the conclusion drawn by the sugar manufacturer.

dj · Answer

B for me. A -> The US says that Japan is not an open market, thus opening US market won't effect Japan's stance -- wrong C -> Yes we know that... nothing to infer.

D -> whoa! Japanese are suggesting The US to concentrate on improving skills/research not on mistrust whatsoever. E -> last part of this statement quite restricted the scope. We want to trade ...ah!, but we don't really want ...ah! B -> Japanese negates The US' complain that the trade deficit is b/c of the closed doors, but, it really, is b/c of the lack of skills and training, which Japanese want to embrace from The US. A for me... D is staring at me

B -> alright, a good one, but doesn't states clearly whether people ate more of the low-calorie diet itself or switched to somethin else. OUT C -> just one more premise to what CR already said. OUT D -> I am stuck on this... need a good explanation from someone

E -> good enough, The revenue of the company will increase either way. Doesn't weaken. Just a premise. OUT A states that there is something else that might have caused the obesity, not the in-effective low fat sweetner. Thus, manufactures are wrong in judging that sweetner is in-effective. It is effective but the effect is overpowered by some other factors.

Paul · Answer

B and D
1 was widely explained already
2- This is a double negative question. Restated properly, it asks which answer supports the consumption of low-calorie, alternative sweeteners?
A) low-calorie, alternative sweeteners induce consumers to consume other "non-low-calories" food.  Does not support  use of low-calorie sweeteners.
B) low-calorie, alternative sweeteners make people eat more, that is why they are obese.  Does not support  use of low-calorie sweeteners.
C) this answer has no impact on obesity and does nothing to support the use of low-calorie sweeteners.
D) sweeteners  ARE  effective because obese people lost weight by using those sweeteners.
E) out of scope

1- U.S officials complain that the country's trade deficit

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards