Join us for MBA Spotlight – The Top 20 MBA Fair      Schedule of Events | Register

It is currently 05 Jun 2020, 12:26

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Economic considerations color every aspect of international dealings

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 21 Sep 2004
Posts: 338
Economic considerations color every aspect of international dealings  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 19 Jan 2020, 05:28
1
13
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  55% (hard)

Question Stats:

56% (02:00) correct 44% (02:14) wrong based on 828 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Economic considerations color every aspect of international dealings, and nations are just like individuals in that the lender sets the terms of its dealings with the borrower. That is why a nation that owes money to another nation cannot be world leader.

The reasoning in the passage assumes which one of the following?


(A) A nation that does not lend to any other nation cannot be a world leader.

(B) A nation that can set the terms of its dealings with other nations is certain to be a world leader.

(C) A nation that has the terms of its dealings with another action set by that nation cannot be a world leader.

(D) A nation that is a world leader can borrow from another nation as long as that other nation does not set the terms of the dealings between the two nations.

(E) A nation that has no dealings with any other nation cannot be world leader.

Originally posted by vprabhala on 22 Mar 2005, 16:42.
Last edited by Bunuel on 19 Jan 2020, 05:28, edited 3 times in total.
Renamed the topic.
CEO
CEO
User avatar
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 2916
Location: Singapore
Re: Economic considerations color every aspect of international dealings  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Mar 2005, 19:06
2
1
1) Economic considerations color every aspect of international dealing
2) Nations are just like individuals in that the lender sets the terms of its dealing with the borrower
3) That is why a nation that owes money to another nation cannot be a world leader <-- conclusion

nation owe money ---> cannot be world leader
can be world leader ---> does not owe money

Conclusion is true only if a nation is a world leader when it does not owe money to any other nation. We need an assumption along this line of reasoning.

The reasoning in the passage assumes which one of the following?

(A) A nation that does not lend to any other nation cannot be a world leader.
- Out

(B) A nation that can set the terms of its dealings with other nations is certain to be a world leader.
- No. We're told the nation can be one, but not definitely one (which the word 'certain' suggests)

(C) A nation that has the terms of its dealings with another action set by that nation cannot be a world leader.
- Yes. If we're told a nation that has the terms of its dealing set by another nation and this is sufficient to make it not be a 'world leader', then it's true that a nation that does not owe money (sets the terms) is a world leader.

(D) A nation that is a world leader can borrow from another nation as long as that other nation does not set the terms of the dealings between the two nations.
- No. Does not tells us why not oweing money makes a nation a world leader

(E) A nation that has no dealings with any other nation cannot be world leader.
- Out

I'll take C
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 14 Jun 2011
Posts: 61
Re: Economic considerations color every aspect of international dealings  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Jun 2013, 20:16
Re-posting for further discussion.

Aristotle CR.

Economic considerations colour every aspect of international dealings, and nations are just like individuals in that the lender sets the terms of its dealings with the borrower. That is why a nation that owes money to another nation cannot be world leader.
The reasoning in the passage assumes which one of the following?
(A) A nation that does not lend to any other nation cannot be a world leader.
(B) A nation that can set the terms of its dealings with other nations is certain
to be a world leader.
(C) A nation that has the terms of its dealings with another action set by that
nation cannot be a world leader.
(D) A nation that is a world leader can borrow from another nation as long as that
other nation does not set the terms of the dealings between the two nations.
(E) A nation that has no dealings with any other nation cannot be world leader.

Doubt: Why is D wrong? What exactly does C mean by another action set?
Retired Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 15 Jun 2012
Posts: 968
Location: United States
Re: Economic considerations color every aspect of international dealings  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Jun 2013, 23:21
3
swati007 wrote:
Doubt: Why is D wrong? What exactly does C mean by another action set?


Hi Swaiti007

This question is about "supporter assumption".

The stimulus says:
Fact: Lender sets the terms of its dealings with a nation who wants to borrow money
Conclusion: a nation that borrows money from another nation cannot be world leader

You can see the flow: Lender sets terms of borrowing to A nation who wants to borrow ==> This nation cannot be World leader.
The assumption should connect "terms of borrowing" to "world leader".
The assumption should be: Any nation who has terms of borrowing that are set by another nation ==> cannot be world leader

C says: A nation that has the terms of its dealings with another action set by that nation cannot be a world leader.
It means: X, who has the terms of X's dealing with Y set by Y, cannot be a world leader
Hence, C is correct.

D is wrong because It's simply a reverse answer. D says: X is world leader because Y does not set terms of dealing with X. But the real assumption is: X has terms of dealing that are set by Y ==> X is not world leader.

Hope it helps.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 13 Jul 2015
Posts: 4
Location: India
Concentration: International Business, Entrepreneurship
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Economic considerations color every aspect of international dealings  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Jul 2016, 12:39
A,E straight away out.

I chose B initially which Says: (B) A nation that can set the terms of its dealings with other nations is certain
to be a world leader.

But, I found the wording of the statement is really strong.This is less like an assumption but seems more like a conclusion.

My answer:
(C) A nation that has the terms of its dealings with another action set by that
nation cannot be a world leader.

This perfectly fits as the answer and also matches the wording.
Manhattan Prep Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 22 Mar 2011
Posts: 1724
Re: Economic considerations color every aspect of international dealings  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Jul 2016, 16:40
1
1
Actually, B and C are equally strong. B says "If X happens, then Y will certainly happen." C says "If X does NOT happen, Y will certainly NOT happen."

The easiest way to spot the difference is in looking at the end result. The argument concludes that certain countries will NOT be world leaders, so we need a choice that leads to that outcome. Knowing what will guarantee leadership does not tell us what will prevent leadership. However, we could just as well look at the first part of the conditional. We are talking about countries that CANNOT set their own terms, so the premise feeds into C, not B.

A more intuitive way to look at it is that B helps us to conclude that lending countries ARE world leaders (something the argument isn't claiming), while C addresses the actual claim made in the argument: that borrowing countries cannot be world leaders.
_________________

Dmitry Farber | Manhattan Prep GMAT Instructor | San Diego


Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Course Reviews | View Instructor Profile |
Manhattan GMAT Reviews
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
V
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 2445
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Kelley '20, ISB '19
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: Economic considerations color every aspect of international dealings  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Dec 2017, 06:02
vprabhala wrote:
Economic considerations color every aspect of international dealings, and nations are just like individuals in that the lender sets the terms of its dealings with the borrower. That is why a nation that owes money to another nation cannot be world leader.

The reasoning in the passage assumes which one of the following?

(A) A nation that does not lend to any other nation cannot be a world leader.

(B) A nation that can set the terms of its dealings with other nations is certain to be a world leader.

(C) A nation that has the terms of its dealings with another action set by that nation cannot be a world leader.

(D) A nation that is a world leader can borrow from another nation as long as that other nation does not set the terms of the dealings between the two nations.

(E) A nation that has no dealings with any other nation cannot be world leader.


"the conclusion is about nations who own the money can not be a leader, but that does not mean the other nation would be a leader." Indeed, as far as we're concerned, maybe none of them can be a world leader.

So we're concluding that a nation that owes money to another nation cannot be a world leader. But all we know from the premise about the debtor nation is that it doesn't get to set the terms of the deal -- it's the lender who gets to set the terms. So we need an assumption that says, "If you're not setting the terms of your loan, you can't be a world leader."

That's exactly what (C) says, which is why it's correct.

(A) is out because this doesn't tell us anything about the nation that owes money.

(B) also is irrelevant as we discussed; we care about the nation that borrows, not the one that lends.

(D) was tempting to me, but it's actually backwards. It's telling us that if the other nation doesn't set the terms, you can be a world leader -- but that doesn't mean you can't be a world leader if the other nation does set the terms.

(E) is incorrect because we're talking about a nation that does have dealings with other nations.
_________________
When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford
The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long
Non-Human User
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 9082
Re: Economic considerations color every aspect of international dealings  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 May 2019, 02:51
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.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Economic considerations color every aspect of international dealings   [#permalink] 03 May 2019, 02:51

Economic considerations color every aspect of international dealings

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





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