A study suggests that while the manufacturing industry contributes a

Question

"A study suggests that while the manufacturing industry contributes a whopping 40% of the total taxes collected by the national government, only 10% of the total subsidies, granted by the government, go to the manufacturing industry in the forms of lower cost of raw materials, fuel etc. This is when the manufacturing industry is second only to agriculture in generating employment and, is probably the main force behind establishing the nation as a major global economic power. Clearly, the subsidy structure in the nation is unfair and more must be done for passing the subsidies to the manufacturing industry."

The argument claims that manufacturing industry contributes a whooping 40% of the total taxes but gets only 10% of the total subsides and the author concludes by saying that the subsidy structure is unfair and manufacturing industry should recieve higher subsidies. This argument is flawed on several basis and has several aspects which the author has not evaluated while reaching the conclusion.

First, the argument readily assumes that 10 percent subsidies to the manufacturing company are not enough to sustain their production. For example, the manufacturing company is already a profit making firm and dosen't need any subsidy but still it is getting 10 percent from the government, this implies that 10 percent subsidy is more than enough for the company. If the argument would have presented the adequate data of the amount of subsidy and the company spendings and requirments, it would have been much stronger.

Second, the author fails to broaden the argument horizon by only stating that government is providing 10% subsidies to manufacturing industry and it is unfair but not considering other factors in account. For example, if the government is providing clearences for manufacturing, land benifits, supporting the industry in markets, other initiatives which have helped company gain substatital amounts of profit and revenue, then government providing 10 percent subsidy alongside the other benifits can be fruitful and not necessarily unfair.

Third, the argument fails to mention one of the key aspects on which it could be evaluated. If there had been some empirical data about the subsidy amount in relation to the requirments and benifits to the company. If the country has a huge economy and a whooping budget, then 10% subsidy can be a grand amount which is more than sufficient for the manufacturing industry.

Finally, the author fails to consider many aspects of the argument and without this information the argument remains unsubstatiated and open to debate.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

AWA Score: 5 out of 6

Coherence and connectivity: 4/5 
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.

Paragraph structure and formation: 4.5/5  
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs are evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.

Vocabulary and word expression: 4.5/5 
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word usage. Simple is the best form of suave!

Good Luck

yashrajrathi20 · Answer

Thank you so much sir.

GautamKhanduja · Answer

Hi  Sajjad1994  Can you please evaluate my essay. Thanks.

The editor of newspaper points out that even though manufacturing industry contributes to 40% of the total taxes collected by the govenrment, only 10% of the government subsidies go to the manufacturing industry in forms of lower cost of raw material, fuel etc. The editor potrays the significance of manufacturing industry by pointing out two facts:

1) The manufacturing industry in second only to agriculture in generating employement

2) Manufacturing industry is probably the main force that is establishing nation as global economic power.

Pointing out to the above facts, editor calls the subsidy structure as unfair and demands more subsidies for manufacturing industry. However, the editor's argument is flawed because of three main problems and demands of editor do not hold water unless more information is provided and a few assumptions are corrected.

Firstly, even though the percentage of subsidies provided by government to manufacturing sector is 10% of total subsidies, the editor fails to explain the need for more subsidies. There is a possibility that the total amount of subsidies is so huge that even 10% of total subsidies is more than enough for the manufacturing sector to fulfill it's needs. Maybe, the governement has provided other incentives such as import quotas and other manufacturing schemes that are more benefecial than subsidies and hence remove the need for any further subsidies to manufacturing sector.

Secondly, editor establishes the fact that manufacturing industry is main force behind nation's global economic power without providing any evidence to support this conclusion. It seems suspicious that manufacturing sector is so financially dominant in the nation even though more workforce is employed in agriculture. Also, no figures for contribution of service sector are provided to prove that manufacturing sector is more economically powerful than service sector.

Thirdly, even if we consider that less subsidies are given to manufacturing sector, increasing those subsidies would result in a decrease in subsidies from other areas of the economy. Hence, solving one problem would lead to creation of other problems. The editor does not provide any solution to tackle the shortage of funds that may arise in areas as important as health and education because of giving extra subsidies to manufacturing sector.

Hence, the editor should have taken a more holistic approach of the problem and economy,in general, to lead to the conclusion that subsidy structure is unfair and more subsidies should be given manufacturing industry. The editor should have given more information regarding the econcomic contribution of manufacturing sector in the total GDP of the nation and compare that with economic contributions of agricultural and service sector. Furthermore, the editor should have considered whether there is even a need for additional subsidies to manufacturing industry? Until and unless, the aforementioned information is provided, the line of reasoning remains to be flawed and the conclusion remains uncertain.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

AWA Score: 5 - 5.5 out of 6

Coherence and Connectivity: 5/6
The essay generally maintains coherence and connectivity throughout. The points are logically connected and flow from one paragraph to the next. However, there are some minor instances where the transitions between sentences and ideas could be smoother.

Word Structure: 5.5/6
The word structure in the essay is good, with clear and concise language used effectively. There are only minor issues, such as some awkward phrasing (e.g., "in generating employement" should be "in generating employment") that could be improved.

Paragraph Structure and Formation: 5.5/6
The essay is organized into clear paragraphs, each addressing specific points or aspects of the argument. However, the introduction could be more explicit in outlining the main points that will be discussed in the body of the essay. A more detailed roadmap for the reader would improve paragraph formation.

Language and Grammar: 5.5/6
Language and grammar are generally strong, with only minor issues such as typos (e.g., "govenrment" should be "government") and a few awkward sentence structures. These issues do not significantly hinder comprehension but could be improved for a perfect score.

Vocabulary and Word Expression: 5/6
The vocabulary and word expression in the essay are effective, with appropriate and varied word choices. However, there is room for improvement in terms of using more precise and nuanced vocabulary in some instances to enhance clarity and precision.

Overall, this is a well-written essay that effectively critiques the argument's reasoning and use of evidence. With minor improvements in coherence, paragraph formation, language, and vocabulary, it could achieve a higher score.

A study suggests that while the manufacturing industry contributes a

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