It is currently 21 Oct 2017, 02:20

### 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

# Claim: Country Xs government lowered tariff barriers because

Author Message
Senior Manager
Joined: 31 May 2006
Posts: 368

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 0

Location: Phoenix AZ
Claim: Country Xs government lowered tariff barriers because [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2006, 08:34
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (00:01) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Claim: Country Xs government lowered tariff barriers because doing so served the interests of powerful foreign companies.
Principle: In order for a change to be explained by the advantage some person or group gained from it, it must be shown how the interests of the person or group played a role in bringing about the change.
Which one of the following, if true, can most logically serve as a premise for an argument that uses the principle to counter the claim?

A. Foreign companies did benefit when Country X lowered tariff barriers, but consumers in Country X benefited just as much.

B. In the period since tariff barriers were lowered, price competition among importers has severely limited importers profits from selling foreign companies products in Country X.

C. It was impossible to predict how Country Xs economic reforms, which included lowering tariff barriers, would affect the economy in the short term.

D. Many of the foreign companies that benefited from Country Xs lowering tariff barriers compete fiercely among themselves both in Country X and in other markets.

E. Although foreign companies benefited when Country X lowered tariff barriers, there is no other evidence that these foreign companies induced the change.

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 24 Sep 2005
Posts: 1884

Kudos [?]: 379 [0], given: 0

Re: CR --- tariff barriers [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2006, 08:46
mailtheguru wrote:
Claim: Country Xs government lowered tariff barriers because doing so served the interests of powerful foreign companies.
Principle: In order for a change to be explained by the advantage some person or group gained from it, it must be shown how the interests of the person or group played a role in bringing about the change.
Which one of the following, if true, can most logically serve as a premise for an argument that uses the principle to counter the claim?

E. Although foreign companies benefited when Country X lowered tariff barriers, there is no other evidence that these foreign companies induced the change.

The principle's point: in order to be qualified for some advantage brought out by a change, the entity must be the one who induces that change.

--->The principle counters the claim by assuming what E is about.

E it is.

Kudos [?]: 379 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Posts: 1012

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2006, 08:53
I too will go with E.
_________________

The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short;
the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy.

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Posts: 37

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Location: LA California

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2006, 14:37
Vote for E

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 28

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

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2006, 14:37
Mine is E

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

Intern
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 15

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

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2006, 14:43

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

Manager
Joined: 28 Feb 2006
Posts: 82

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2006, 17:36
Another one for E.

Claim: tarriff barriers were lowered to serve the interests of foreign companies

Principle: To justify a change that would serve the interests of a group, it needs to be shown that the group's interest necessitated the change.

E says that there is no evidence to support the claim that the interests of foreign companies induced the lowering of tarriffs. Hence this premise supports the principle to counter the claim.
_________________

Try and try until you succeed! There is just no giving up!

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 25 Jun 2006
Posts: 1161

Kudos [?]: 190 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2006, 18:38
E looks good.

Kudos [?]: 190 [0], given: 0

05 Oct 2006, 18:38
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Claim: Country Xs government lowered tariff barriers because

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne 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®.