Defense Department analysts worry that the ability of the United State

Question

Defense Department analysts worry that the ability of the United States to wage a prolonged war would be seriously endangered if the machine-tool manufacturing base shrinks further. Before the Defense Department publicly connected this security issue with the import quota issue, however, the machine-tool industry raised the national security issue in its petition for import quotas.

Which of the following, if true, contributes most to an explanation of the machine-tool industry's raising the issue above regarding national security?

(A) When the aircraft industries retooled, they provided a large amount of work for tool builders.

(B) The Defense Department is only marginally concerned with the effects of foreign competition on the machine-tool industry.

(C) The machine-tool industry encountered difficulty in obtaining governmental protection against imports on grounds other than defense.

(D) A few weapons important for defense consist of parts that do not require extensive machining.

(E) Several federal government programs have been designed which will enable domestic machine-tool manufacturing firms to compete successfully with foreign toolmakers.

Since the size of the machine-tool manufacturing base presumably has implications in the areas beyond national security, one might find it surprising that the industry raised the security issue in its petition. Choice C, the best answer, explains that the industry turned to this issue because others tended to be ineffective in efforts to obtain governmental protection.

Choices A and B, on the other hand, merely explain why the industry might not raise the security issue. Choice A suggests that the industry might have raised the issue of jobs instead. Choice B suggests that the part of the government concerned with security is not concerned enough with the industry’s import problem to take action. Neither D nor E is relevant to the industry’s choice of strategy for securing import quotas.

KarishmaB · Accepted Answer

First, focus on what the argument is saying. 
What happens when a govt does not establish import quotas for a particular good? The foreign competition might drive the local manufacturers out of the market. If you establish a quota (i.e. only a certain quantity can be imported), then the local manufacturer stays protected. 
Defense Department worries that the ability to wage a prolonged war would be endangered if the machine-tool manufacturing base shrinks further. (because during war, imports may not be possible or too expensive - you need to manufacture your supplies within your borders)
Before the Defense Department the machine-tool industry raised the national security issue in its petition for import quotas. - now defense is not the concern of the machine tool industry so there is something missing here, right? Why would they bring in the defense angle in its petition for import quotas. Most industries would use 'loss of livelihood', 'closing down of factories', 'quality concern' etc as reasons in their petition for import quota.

So the question is 'why did they use the defense angle?'

(A) When the aircraft industries retooled, they provided a large amount of work for tool builders.  
Out of Scope

(B)The Defense Department is only marginally concerned with the effects of foreign competition on the machine-tool industry.  
If the defense department is not very concerned with the effects of foreign competition on the machine tool industry, it would not help to bring national security (responsibility of the defense department) in the picture. Hence the fact that the defense department doesn't care much would not be a reason to bring in the national security issue. Anyway, we don't need to make the defense department care, we need to make the govt care.

(C) The machine-tool industry encountered difficulty in obtaining governmental protection against imports on grounds other than defense.  
Right. So the machine tool industry tried many other things but they couldn't get govt protection on those grounds. That is why they brought in the defense angle - hoping for the govt protection on national security grounds. Now it makes sense why they would talk about defense.

(D) A few weapons important for defense consist of parts that do not require extensive machining.  
Out of scope

(E) Several federal government programs have been designed which will enable domestic machine-tool manufacturing firms to compete successfully with foreign toolmakers.  
Then the tool makers shouldn't ask for import quota at all.

Answer (C)

pqhai · Answer

Hi TGC,

First of all, we need to understand  the logic of quotas . The reason for setting import quotas is to protect internal industries from competition of foreign competitors.
There are two cases:
(1)  No quotas:  Internal industries will have difficulties because foreign competitors can sell products without any restrictions.
(2)  Have quotas:  Internal industries will NOT have difficulties because there are some limitations for foreign competitors.

This is resolve the paradox question, so  what is paradox here?  The paradox is:   If there are import quotas, Machine Tool Industry (MTI) should be protected and will grow. But why MTI still maintains that the import quotas policies do not help?

The reason is:
  Machine Tool Industry products = Defense products + Other products.
  
 MTI will have difficulties if  
(1) Sales of Defense products decline
(2) Sales of Other products decline
(3) Sale of both Defense products and Other products decline

In this question, MTI asks for help because  the industry's sales of other products account for bigger portion of the industry's sales. BUT this segment does not have protection from government  ==> MTI industry cannot grow ==> It will affect the ability of the United States to wage a prolonged war.

C says exactly the same reason. Hence, it is correct.

Hope my post helps you.

GMATNinja · Answer

I'm not sure if this is why you're struggling with this question, but the chronology in the passage is a little bit funky. So let's start by breaking down the chronology.

In the first sentence we know that the Defense Department is worried because the machine-tool manufacturing base (that's a mouthful -- we'll call it the "industry" from here on out) has shrunk  in the past . The beginning of the second sentence implies that the Defense Department has brought up the import quota issue because of the stuff in the first sentence. This gives us the following chronology so far:

1. the industry shrank
2. the Defense Department became worried
3. the Defense Department raised the import quota issue

So far, so good. The second half of the second sentence tells us that the industry did two things  before  the Defense Department raised the import quota issue (#3 above):

the industry raised the national security issue (presumably the shrinking of the industry) 
 the industry petitioned for import quotas

Now that we have that timeline clear, hopefully it'll be easier to answer the question of  why  the industry raised the national security issue!

So, which answer choice contributes most to an explanation of the machine-tool industry raising this issue?

Making sure that there are lots of jobs for tool builders is great, but does it help us understand why the industry raised the national security issue? Not really. This answer choice helps us understand why the industry might be seeking help from the government, but it doesn't help us understand why the industry  specifically  raised the national security issue. So we can eliminate answer choice (A).

If the Defense Department isn't particularly concerned with the effects of foreign competition on the industry, it would be odd for the industry to be particularly concerned with the national security effects. After all, it is it  job  of the Defense Department to be concerned with national security issues. So this doesn't help explain why the industry is raising the issue. We can eliminate answer choice (B).

The industry is petitioning for an import quota. It isn't hard to imagine why: if there's an import quota then there are fewer foreigner competitors that the industry has to compete with at home. Answer choice (C) implies that they unsuccessfully tried to petition for import quotas in the past on the basis of some other argument than national security. The argument itself implies the government became more interested in the national security issue once the industry raised the issue –- the Defense Department started paying attention! So answer choice (C) does a pretty good job of explaining why the industry raised the national security issue: other attempts to get governmental protection had failed! We'll leave answer choice (C) in.

Answer choice (D) would downplay the industry's national security argument. If there are weapons that don't require machining, then it isn't as big of a deal if the domestic industry continues to shrink. So this doesn't help explain why the industry raised the national security issue and we can eliminate answer choice (D).

If there are several programs that have been designed to help the industry, then this downplays the need for the industry's national security argument since they're already being helped by the government. So we can eliminate answer choice (E).

That leaves us with answer choice (C) as the only answer that helps explain why the industry raised the national security issue.

I hope that helps!

vageesh · Answer

C. The machine-tool industry encountered difficulty in obtaining governmental protection against imports on grounds other than defense. 
machine-tool industry raised national security issue in its petition for import quotas to take leverage of the position taken by the defense dept. Industry made its petition strong & implied that "if you don't accept this petition, Industry will shrink & that shrinkage will have an impact on National Security"

aditya8062 · Answer

my take wud be  C  :  The machine-tool industry encountered difficulty in obtaining governmental protection against imports on grounds other than defense.

TGC · Answer

Can some expert pour in and explain please.

I am unable to get the stimulus itself,answering it is another step.

Plz Advise!

Rgds,
TGC !!

TGC · Answer

Hi,

Although your explanation is appropriate,I am still unable to get the stimulus as to why it is a paradox.

Before the Defense Department publicly connected this security issue with the import quota issue, however, the machine-tool industry raised the national security issue in its petition for import quotas.

Above statement says that "Before DD connected security with import , MTI raised NSI in its petition for Import Quotas".Somehow I am unable to get this statement because of the usage of "However".Don't know where the contrast lies when MTI and DD both are connecting Security Issue with the Imports.

Shrinkage of MTI => USA ability decreases to wage a prolonged war.

Plz Advise

Rgds,
TGC !

pqhai · Answer

Hi TGC.

The most important thing is the intended meaning of the stimulus , don't simply see signal words such as however, but, etc... and determine two sides of the paradox.  In 700+ questions, many signal words are trap. . You should read the stimulus carefully to digest the intended meaning.

I will reorganize and rephrase some parts of the stimulus.

Defense Department analysts worry that the ability of the United States to wage a prolonged war would be seriously endangered if the machine-tool manufacturing base shrinks further.       However, the machine-tool industry raised the national security issue in its petition for import quotas.

The question stem is:

Which of the following, if true, contributes most to an explanation of the machine-tool industry’s raising the issue       national security?

Does it help you? Let me know.

TGC · Answer

Yes , now its clear enough.However,I would have never got the stimulus the way you interpreted it for me.In fact, this question literally killed me.

Rgds,
TGC !

sleepynut · Answer

Hi expert,
I couldn't dissect the argument.What does the second sentence explain?

sayantanc2k · Answer

The second part of the second sentence ( the machine-tool industry raised the national security issue in its petition for import quotas ) is important for arriving at option C.

The (domestic) machine tools industry wants the government to ban or hinder imports of machine tools so that the domestic industry flourishes. In order to support its petition (to persuade the government to hinder the imports), the industry has cited that national security may be compromised if machine tools are imported.

Option C explains why the industry did so.

anje29 · Answer

To explain : he machine-tool industry raised the national security issue in its petition for import quotas.

A. When the aircraft industries retooled, they provided a large amount of work for tool builders.
  Out of scope . Topic is related to defense .

B. The Defense Department is only marginally concerned with the effects of foreign competition on the machine-tool industry.
 Irrelevant

C. The machine-tool industry encountered difficulty in obtaining governmental protection against imports on grounds other than defense.
  This choice explains machine tool industry raised national security issue because it was unable to obtain protection against any other factor except defense.

D. A few weapons important for defense consist of parts that do not require extensive machining.
  Irrelevant

E. Several federal government programs have been designed which will enable domestic machine-tool manufacturing firms to compete successfully with foreign toolmakers.
  Irrelevant

vnigam21 · Answer

Even after going through the above explanations, I am not able to understand the following argument itself. Can anyone please help in explaining the argument only.

Defense Department analysts worry that the ability of the United States to wage a prolonged war would be seriously endangered if the machine-tool manufacturing base shrinks further. Before the Defense Department publicly connected this security issue with the import quota issue, however, the machine-tool industry raised the national security issue in its petition for import quotas.

My understanding :

Defense Department is worried about the ability of the US to wage and support a prolonged war is endangered if machine-tool manufacturing base shrinks further. (Some Machine Tool manufacturing Base is shrinking which will endanger the ability of the US to wage(?) a prolonged war, this is causing Defense Department to worry)

Now, there is some connection of security issue with some import quota issue (I am not able to get this statement at all, please can you explain). In earlier statement we were talking about the worry of DD which was related to wage a war. Now security issue I get, but what is the meaning of import quota? 
Security Issue - US not able to wage a war, so it can be a security concern
Import Quota Issue - As per my understanding, the import of machine tools by machine-tool manufacturing base, as it is shrinking

The machine tool industry raised the national security issue in its petition for import quotas. (As cannot follow the above line, so this conclusion does not make any sense to me) Even I did not get what does it mean "National Security Issue for Import Quotas". The security issue was that US was not able to wage a prolonged war, than how that is linked to import quotas.

ChiranjeevSingh · Answer

The link that you are missing is the link the question assumes (and even other questions will assume). The link is between the imports of goods and the impact on the local industry. What happens if there are imports of goods? It negatively impacts the local industry. Right? What if we limit the imports through some import quota? It'll be better for the local industry. Right?

Now, if your security is at stake if an industry shrinks further, isn't it logical that you'll start thinking of import quotas in that industry so that the local industry is saved?

- Chiranjeev

taruns2000 · Answer

Paradaox -
Import quota - minimum limit on import.
It is important to understand that " Import Quota limit" can be good for one group and bad for another.

current supply for defense = Manufacturing industry + import

Manufacturing industry suppy may decrease so defense department wants to increase import hence increase import quota limit.

Import quota limit is bad for Defense Department because manufacture industry may shrink and for prolonged war defense department required more defense supply.
On the other hand,
import quota limit is good for Machine tool industry because it will help against foreign competition. Hence, machine tool industry wants the quota limit to be present or not increased.

Now, Paradox is-

Defense department wanted to use national security to increase quota raising security concern.
Machine tool industry gave same  national security  reason to put quota.

Why?

Option C explains that it will be easier to get the quota implemented by giving defense related (national security related) issue.

No other option explains this paradox.

Difficult part - It is difficult to comprehend that what is import quota and it can swing both ways good or bad for different groups.

Cheers!!

oasis90 · Answer

I spent 3:30 minutes on this question and got it wrong.

I narrowed down the choices to B and C. Ultimately, I chose

B. The Defense Department is only marginally concerned with the effects of foreign competition on the machine-tool industry.

My rationale: if the The Defense Department is only marginally concerned with the effects of foreign competition on the machine-tool industry, then maybe The Defense Department did not connect the dots between declining machine tool industry and the effect of that on national security. Therefore, the machine tool industry raised the national security issue in its petition for import quotas in order to bring the Defense Department's attention to the issue and get support required.

Obviously this is incorrect, but am not sure why. Can anyone please clarify?

Thanks

aragonn · Answer

Hey friend, let me try to help you. What I don't like about this question is that it is expecting someone to know somethings such as below lines, else its hard to do.

An  import quota  is a type of trade restriction that sets a physical limit on the quantity of a good that can be imported into a country in a given period of time.Quotas, like other trade restrictions, are typically used to benefit the producers of a good in that economy.

Premise:  for prolonged war they need machine-tool manufacturing. but this industry is shrinking. with import quota issue whole situation become gigantic. DDP want to raise this one but machine-tool industry raised first.

Pre-thinking:  Why indeed machine-tool industry raised this issue? Well this industry is shrinking , this means either demand for tools is less or imports are too high. as industry raised quota issue, i think its high import problem. So if we focus on why there is high imports, it will take us in right direction. 
 
Which of the following, if true, contributes most to an explanation of the machine-tool industry's raising the issue above regarding national security?

(A) When the aircraft industries retooled, they provided a large amount of work for too builders. ---- this is not addressing the real problem on import fronts.

(B) The Defense Department is only marginally concerned with the effects of foreign competition on the machine-tool industry.---- this is not addressing the real problem on import fronts.

(C) The machine-tool industry encountered difficulty in obtaining governmental protection against imports on grounds other than defense.   --- this is interesting choice. let say tools this industry make are used both defense and commercial purpose. but industry has been encouraged by gov only for defense sector, while commercial sector is relying more on imports and gov is not doing anything about it. this industry is shrinking because that one is glooming.

(D) A few weapons important for defense consist of parts that do not require extensive machining.---- this is not addressing the real problem on import fronts.

(E) Several federal government programs have been designed which will enable domestic machine-tool manufacturing firms to compete successfully with foreign toolmakers.---- this is not addressing the real problem on import fronts.

Hope it helped, If not please raise a specific question. thanks!

smmunna · Answer

Defense Department analysts worry that the ability of the United States to wage a prolonged war would be seriously endangered if the machine-tool manufacturing base shrinks further. Before the Defense Department publicly connected this security issue with the import quota issue, however, the machine-tool industry raised the national security issue in its petition for import quotas.

Which of the following, if true, contributes most to an explanation of the machine-tool industrys 
raising the issue above regarding national security?

A. When the aircraft industries retooled, they provided a large amount of work for toobuilders. 
B. The Defense Department is only marginally concerned with the effects of foreigncompetition on the machine-tool industry. 
C. The machine-tool industry encountered difficulty in obtaining governmental protection against imports on grounds other than defense. 
D. A few weapons important for defense consist of parts that do not require extensivemachining. 
E. Several federal government programs have been designed which will enable domesticmachine-tool manufacturing firms to compete successfully with foreign toolmakers.

Stimulus states 2 different aspects - one from Defense Dept point of view and other from machine tool industry point of view. Defense dept says that US cannot sustain a prolonged war and needs to import;however, machine tool industry says that import would pose a threat to the national security. Now, we have been asked to find an explanation as to why machine tool industry raised this issue in its petition.

The reason why machine tool industry raised this issue may be because of the fact that industry tried to obtain the same in the past but it might have been rejected on grounds of national security. So, answer goes in favor of C

Probus · Answer

Hi
Hi  chiranjeev ,

Could you help me on validating my argument.

Dense Department analysts worry that the ability of the United States to wage a prolonged war would be seriously endangered if the machine-tool manufacturing base shrinks further. 
 ( So Defense analyst (worry) predict that ability of US to wage long term war would be at risk if certain industries base shrinks further. A point to not here is the highlighted portion . Th industry is already growing small. Any further decrease from this point is a serous concern for Deference analyst)

Now to understand the argument further we need to understand the structure of the sentence . Before X, Y. 
So Y happens first and then X happens.

X is : Before the Defense Department publicly connected this security issue with the import quota issue,

So defense dept connected this issue( ability of US to wage prolonged war at risk because of shrinking base of MTI) with import quota issue. ( that means currently there are not enough taxes levied or no taxes on the import of certain industry products )

and Y is : the machine-tool industry raised the national security issue in its petition for import quotas

So the machine tool industries do want tariffs to be applied on imports of certain products ( may be machine tools) 
and reasoned a national security issue to support the claim.

All in all the Defense dept and the small tool industry association are for import tariffs on machine toll industry products)

Many posts i have seen above are telling this is a paradox question. There is no paradox in the argument above. Both are for tariffs on imports . One reasons defense security angle and other reasons national security. Aren't both same.

Is national security not a defense security

Which of the following, if true, contributes most to an explanation of the machine-tool industrys raising the issue above regarding national security?

Question asked to us is which of the following would help most ( maximum) in explaining why MTI rose the import quota issue regarding national security.

Where did i miss to understand the paradox. And what is the paradox in above argument. ( the post of @pqhai) mentions it as paradox, but i beg to disagree with him.

Requesting your valuable input

Thanks 
Probus

Defense Department analysts worry that the ability of the United State

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

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Defense Department analysts worry that the ability of the United State

Prep Toolkit

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