GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 16 Oct 2019, 12:33

### 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

# Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 11 Mar 2013
Posts: 8
Re: Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Aug 2015, 19:08
1
How come "D" is an answer?
D says: Other countries, such as Canada and Russia, are likely to produce more wheat if the United States were to reduce its output.

We do not know how much the current production stats of Canada and Russia. It might be possible, United States is currently producing 80 pc of global market and combined Canada and Russia is 2 pc. Even if Canada and Russia would doubled the wheat production (4 pc) wouldn't suffice the criteria and need.
Marshall & McDonough Moderator
Joined: 13 Apr 2015
Posts: 1684
Location: India
Re: Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Jan 2016, 22:42
3
Currently supply > demand --> So price is less.
Conclusion: Reduce supply to balance the demand --> Price will increase

A. Wheat that is not processed for consumption is often used for certain industrial applications. - Incorrect - Irrelevant

B. Non-governmental buyers of wheat and wheat products are able to predict how much wheat they will need several years in advance. - Incorrect - Does not weaken the conclusion

C. The United States government offers similar subsidies to soybean farmers, though the global price of soybeans is significantly higher than that of wheat. - Incorrect

D. Other countries, such as Canada and Russia, are likely to produce more wheat if the United States were to reduce its output. - Correct - This statement weakens the conclusion by stating that the overall supply will not be reduced. So supply > demand and the price will not increase

E. The price of sorghum, a crop for which the United States government offers no subsidies, is lower than that of wheat. - Incorrect - Irrelevant

Manager
Joined: 12 Mar 2015
Posts: 82
GPA: 3.9
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Jan 2016, 04:02
souvik101990 wrote:
Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States government, through farm subsidies, is responsible for the artificially low global price of wheat. Because the U.S. government buys whatever wheat American farmers are unable to sell on the open market, American farmers have no incentive to modulate the size of their crops according to the needs of the global market. As a result, American farmers routinely produce more wheat than the global market can absorb and the global price of wheat is kept low. Without these subsidies, the farmers in developing economies claim, American farmers would produce only the amount of wheat that they could sell on the open market and the global price of wheat would rise.

Which of the following, if true, most weakens the claims of the farmers in developing countries regarding the price of wheat?

A. Wheat that is not processed for consumption is often used for certain industrial applications.

B. Non-governmental buyers of wheat and wheat products are able to predict how much wheat they will need several years in advance.

C. The United States government offers similar subsidies to soybean farmers, though the global price of soybeans is significantly higher than that of wheat.

D. Other countries, such as Canada and Russia, are likely to produce more wheat if the United States were to reduce its output.

E. The price of sorghum, a crop for which the United States government offers no subsidies, is lower than that of wheat.

The objective here is to show that even if American farmers reduce their output yield of wheat crop the global price of wheat crop must not drop

Option D - says the output yield will remain the same even if American farmers reduce their output yield of wheat crop.

D
Current Student
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
Posts: 804
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
GPA: 3.98
Re: Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jul 2016, 12:11
1
goodyear2013 wrote:
Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States government, through farm subsidies, is responsible for the artificially low global price of wheat. Because the U.S. government buys whatever wheat American farmers are unable to sell on the open market, American farmers have no incentive to modulate the size of their crops according to the needs of the global market. As a result, American farmers routinely produce more wheat than the global market can absorb and the global price of wheat is kept low. Without these subsidies, the farmers in developing economies claim, American farmers would produce only the amount of wheat that they could sell on the open market and the global price of wheat would rise.

Which of the following, if true, most weakens the claims of the farmers in developing countries regarding the price of wheat?

A) Wheat that is not processed for consumption can be used for certain industrial applications.
B) Non-governmental buyers of wheat and wheat products are able to predict how much wheat they will need several years in advance.
C) The United States government offers similar subsidies to soybean farmers, though the global price of soybeans is significantly higher than that of wheat.
D) Other countries, such as Canada and Russia, are likely to produce more wheat if the United States were to reduce its output.
E) The price of sorghum, a crop for which the United States government offers no subsidies, is lower than that of wheat.

Argument implies that more quantity of wheat is the reason for low price.

We have to find a claim that shows that even if government does not control the amount of wheat, price will not reduce.

Price will not reduce if the quantity of wheat remains the same. Option D is stating the same that if USA reduces the quantity, other countries will increase it, and hence, the quantity will remain the same, not increasing the price.
_________________
I welcome critical analysis of my post!! That will help me reach 700+
Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Sep 2014
Posts: 341
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
Re: Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Aug 2016, 23:05
Amit0507 wrote:
I still believe the answer is C. Our assumption is, its the Subsidy which is causing the price control. If we can prove that in spite of offering a subsidy, a crop's price can be left to global demand, we have weakened the argument.

The United States government offers similar subsidies to soybean farmers, though the global price of soybeans is significantly higher than that of wheat.
This is about whose global prices higher. This doesn't mean that soybean global price would be lower if subsidies are not offered. if subsidies are not offered, in that case global price of soybeans could me more higher than that we are talking about.

For example

wheat global price 100

soybean global price 120 (in case subsidies offered)
soybean global price 130 (in case subsidies not offered) : In this case we can still say that the global price of soybean is kept low because of subsidies (difference of 10) but in both cases soybean higher to wheat.

In this statement is rephrased such as : The United States government offers similar subsidies to soybean farmers, though the global price of soybeans is significantly higher than soybean global prices when subsidies not offered. Then, it's a weakener.
Board of Directors
Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Posts: 2513
Location: United States (IL)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V30
GPA: 3.92
WE: General Management (Transportation)
Re: Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Dec 2016, 16:15
I got to D too. If other countries produce more - then US farmers will not be able to sell...
Director
Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 662
Location: India
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Jan 2017, 11:08
Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States government, through farm subsidies, is responsible for the artificially low global price of wheat. Because the U.S. government buys whatever wheat American farmers are unable to sell on the open market, American farmers have no incentive to modulate the size of their crops according to the needs of the global market. As a result, American farmers routinely produce more wheat than the global market can absorb and the global price of wheat is kept low. Without these subsidies, the farmers in developing economies claim, American farmers would produce only the amount of wheat that they could sell on the open market and the global price of wheat would rise.

Which of the following, if true, most weakens the claims of the farmers in developing countries regarding the price of wheat?

A) Wheat that is not processed for consumption can be used for certain industrial applications.
(Out Of Scope)
B) Non-governmental buyers of wheat and wheat products are able to predict how much wheat they will need several years in advance.
(Out Of Scope)
C) The United States government offers similar subsidies to soybean farmers, though the global price of soybeans is significantly higher than that of wheat.
The choice weakens the argument by giving an example of the may not be true condition ,that is the choice says that US subsidies are not the only factor to determine the price of the product,also the price of soybean is independent to that of wheat.
D) Other countries, such as Canada and Russia, are likely to produce more wheat if the United States were to reduce its output.
this is most appropriate weakening choice as it says that even if the US would stop producing exccess other countries would start producing more and still the proces of the product(wheat) will be low due to the over production by other countries.
E) The price of sorghum, a crop for which the United States government offers no subsidies, is lower than that of wheat.
(Of scope since the price of sorghum is not in the argument,it may give an example to show that the US subsidy may or may not impact the prices of a product)
Verbal Forum Moderator
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 2400
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Kelley '20, ISB '19
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Re: Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Jan 2017, 06:09
1
souvik101990 wrote:
Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States government, through farm subsidies, is responsible for the artificially low global price of wheat. Because the U.S. government buys whatever wheat American farmers are unable to sell on the open market, American farmers have no incentive to modulate the size of their crops according to the needs of the global market. As a result, American farmers routinely produce more wheat than the global market can absorb and the global price of wheat is kept low. Without these subsidies, the farmers in developing economies claim, American farmers would produce only the amount of wheat that they could sell on the open market and the global price of wheat would rise.

Which of the following, if true, most weakens the claims of the farmers in developing countries regarding the price of wheat?

A. Wheat that is not processed for consumption is often used for certain industrial applications.

B. Non-governmental buyers of wheat and wheat products are able to predict how much wheat they will need several years in advance.

C. The United States government offers similar subsidies to soybean farmers, though the global price of soybeans is significantly higher than that of wheat.

D. Other countries, such as Canada and Russia, are likely to produce more wheat if the United States were to reduce its output.

E. The price of sorghum, a crop for which the United States government offers no subsidies, is lower than that of wheat.

Farmers in developing countries claim that the global price of wheat is low because American farmers produce too much of the grain. They also claim that American farmers produce too much wheat because they have no incentive to manage their crops, since the U.S. government will buy whatever wheat American farmers cannot sell on the open market. We are asked to find a choice that weakens the claims of the farmers in developing countries that removing the American subsidy would cause the price of wheat to rise.
(A) That there are uses for wheat that is not eaten is irrelevant here. This does not address any aspect of the farmers' claims.
(B) The fact that buyers of wheat can predict their needs in advance is irrelevant here, because the text indicates that American farmers do not pay attention to actual demand for wheat.
(C) In this argument, the global market for soybeans is irrelevant to the global market for wheat, which is a different commodity with different demand, supply, and pricing structures.
(D) CORRECT. The farmers assume that the sole cause of the wheat surplus is the United States. This answer choice suggests that other countries would modify their output to counterbalance any reduction on the part of the United States, keeping prices constant instead of allowing them to rise.
(E) The price of another crop is largely irrelevant. Moreover, the fact that the price of sorghum, a non-subsidized crop, is lower tends to support, rather than weaken, the claims of the farmers.
_________________
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
Intern
Joined: 12 Nov 2014
Posts: 18
Re: Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Apr 2017, 16:52
While solving this:
Claim: First sentence where it says that government is responsible for lower wheat price.
We need to find option which weakens this, that it is not government.
I don't understand how option D does that?
I selected B thinking non government can make the decision by knowing in future.
Director
Joined: 26 Oct 2016
Posts: 613
Location: United States
Schools: HBS '19
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 4
WE: Education (Education)
Re: Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Apr 2017, 21:13
1
Conclusion is ''Wheat price would rise in global market if U S govt stop subsidies''.

Weaken :- "Wheat price would not rise in global market if US govt stop subsidies".

Why?

As per option D, if U S reduces production of wheat then other countries(such as Canada and Russia) are likely to produce more. So the less production in U S will be compensated by more production in other countries, so there would be no effect on price of wheat. It clearly weakens the argument.
Hence option D is correct.
_________________
Thanks & Regards,
Anaira Mitch
Verbal Forum Moderator
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 2400
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Kelley '20, ISB '19
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Re: Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Apr 2017, 21:01
1
Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States government, through farm subsidies, is responsible for the artificially low global price of wheat. Because the U.S. government buys whatever wheat American farmers are unable to sell on the open market, American farmers have no incentive to modulate the size of their crops according to the needs of the global market. As a result, American farmers routinely produce more wheat than the global market can absorb and the global price of wheat is kept low. Without these subsidies, the farmers in developing economies claim, American farmers would produce only the amount of wheat that they could sell on the open market and the global price of wheat would rise.
Type - weaken
Boil it down - Without government subsidies, the American farmers would produce only the amount of wheat that they could sell on the open market and the global price of wheat would rise.
Pre-thinking - Without the subsidy , the supply of wheat produced by American farmers will decrease and the price will rise if the demand is constant. But what if other producers of wheat increase their production ?

A.Wheat that is not processed for consumption can be used for certain industrial applications. - Irrelevant
B.Non-governmental buyers of wheat and wheat products are able to predict how much wheat they will need several years in advance. - Out of scope
C.The United States government offers similar subsidies to soybean farmers, though the global price of soybeans is significantly higher than that of wheat. - mild strengthener ; also the other factors of soybean might differ significantly from wheat
D.Other countries, such as Canada and Russia, are likely to produce more wheat if the United States were to reduce its output. - Correct
E.The price of sorghum, a crop for which the United States government offers no subsidies, is lower than that of wheat. - this weakens to a certain extent but we don't know whether the other factors for sorghum market is comparable to wheat market

_________________
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
Manager
Joined: 26 Dec 2015
Posts: 236
Location: United States (CA)
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
WE: Investment Banking (Venture Capital)
Re: Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Apr 2017, 07:47
i picked "C" b/c it shows that subsidies offered by the US are not directly correlated to the global price of agriculture...i'm not sold on "D"
Manager
Status: In last prep stage
Joined: 11 Jun 2017
Posts: 156
GMAT 1: 630 Q44 V33
GMAT 2: 680 Q47 V37
GPA: 3.2
Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Jul 2018, 18:49
1

Official explanation:

Farmers in developing countries claim that the global price of wheat is low because American farmers produce too much of the grain. They also claim that American farmers produce too much wheat because they have no incentive to manage their crops, since the U.S. government will buy whatever wheat American farmers cannot sell on the open market. We are asked to find a choice that weakens the claims of the farmers in developing countries that removing the American subsidy would cause the price of wheat to rise.

(A) That there are uses for wheat that is not eaten is irrelevant here. This does not address any aspect of the farmers' claims.

(B) The fact that buyers of wheat can predict their needs in advance is irrelevant here, because the text indicates that American farmers do not pay attention to actual demand for wheat.

(C) In this argument, the global market for soybeans is irrelevant to the global market for wheat, which is a different commodity with different demand, supply, and pricing structures.

(D) CORRECT. The farmers assume that the sole cause of the wheat surplus is the United States. This answer choice suggests that other countries would modify their output to counterbalance any reduction on the part of the United States, keeping prices constant instead of allowing them to rise.

(E) The price of another crop is largely irrelevant. Moreover, the fact that the price of sorghum, a non-subsidized crop, is lower tends to support, rather than weaken, the claims of the farmers.

Ans:D
_________________
Thanks,
Ankit
Target Score:730+

If the post was useful,please send the kudos
Intern
Joined: 13 Jun 2016
Posts: 17
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V34
Re: Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Aug 2018, 02:58
Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States government, through farm subsidies, is responsible for the artificially low global price of wheat. Because the U.S. government buys whatever wheat American farmers are unable to sell on the open market, American farmers have no incentive to modulate the size of their crops according to the needs of the global market. As a result, American farmers routinely produce more wheat than the global market can absorb and the global price of wheat is kept low. Without these subsidies, the farmers in developing economies claim, American farmers would produce only the amount of wheat that they could sell on the open market and the global price of wheat would rise.

Which of the following, if true, most weakens the claims of the farmers in developing countries regarding the price of wheat?

(A) Wheat that is not processed for consumption can be used for certain industrial applications. the use doesn't matter,all we care about is the price in the overall open market

(B) Non-governmental buyers of wheat and wheat products are able to predict how much wheat they will need several years in advance. prediction isn't the problem here,the actual price is.

(C) The United States government offers similar subsidies to soybean farmers, though the global price of soybeans is significantly higher than that of wheat. there could be other factors affecting the soybean market,we are more concerned about the wheat market.Irrelevant

(D) Other countries, such as Canada and Russia, are likely to produce more wheat if the United States were to reduce its output. hits the nail on its head.The passage suggests that if American farmers reduce their produce,the prices will fall.But then,Canada and Russia will produce more,negating the effect.

(E) The price of sorghum, a crop for which the United States government offers no subsidies, is lower than that of wheat.sorghum is irrelevant
Intern
Joined: 02 Nov 2015
Posts: 1
Re: Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Sep 2018, 00:59
correct: D) Other countries, such as Canada and Russia, are likely to produce more wheat if the United States were to reduce its output.

reasoning: if other countries, such as C and R, are NOT likely to produce more wheat if the United States were to reduce its output.
Then wheat supply on the open market would not increase and the price would increase.
Manager
Joined: 29 Mar 2015
Posts: 85
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q49 V28
GPA: 3.1
Re: Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Feb 2019, 20:51
karlfurt wrote:
Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States government, through farm subsidies, is responsible for the artificially low global price of wheat. Because the U.S. government buys whatever wheat American farmers are unable to sell on the open market, American farmers have no incentive to modulate the size of their crops according to the needs of the global market. As a result, American farmers routinely produce more wheat than the global market can absorb and the global price of wheat is kept low. Without these subsidies, the farmers in developing economies claim, American farmers would produce only the amount of wheat that they could sell on the open market and the global price of wheat would rise.

Which of the following, if true, most weakens the claims of the farmers in developing countries regarding the price of wheat?

(C) The United States government offers similar subsidies to soybean farmers, though the global price of soybeans is significantly higher than that of wheat.

(D) Other countries, such as Canada and Russia, are likely to produce more wheat if the United States were to reduce its output.

hi someone kindly clear my doubt,
let us Assume USA produces 200 tons of Wheat every year
now due to some reasons USA has removed subsidies and as per option C other countries such as Canada, and Russia have started producing more Wheat

for example
Russia===>110 Ton(earlier) now 120 ton

although both the countries have increased there production of wheat but it is still not sufficient enough to match the level of USA.
than how does this option weakens the claim.

someone kindly guide me and correct me.
Intern
Status: One more try
Joined: 01 Feb 2015
Posts: 37
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Economics
WE: Corporate Finance (Commercial Banking)
Re: Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Mar 2019, 00:31
karlfurt wrote:
Farmers in developing countries
(D) Other countries, such as Canada and Russia, are likely to produce more wheat if the United States were to reduce its output.

The comparison with soyabeans and wheat is irrelevant.
Ans is D because of the output and the price relation is aptly highlighted only by this reasoning.
_________________
Believe you can and you are halfway there-Theodore Roosevelt
Manager
Joined: 22 Sep 2018
Posts: 63
Re: Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Mar 2019, 04:32
Could someone help to explain option D is correct? how does the production of wheat affect the conclusion?
Intern
Joined: 27 Nov 2018
Posts: 3
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
WE: Analyst (Mutual Funds and Brokerage)
Re: Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Mar 2019, 04:38
ak_idc wrote:
karlfurt wrote:
Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States government, through farm subsidies, is responsible for the artificially low global price of wheat. Because the U.S. government buys whatever wheat American farmers are unable to sell on the open market, American farmers have no incentive to modulate the size of their crops according to the needs of the global market. As a result, American farmers routinely produce more wheat than the global market can absorb and the global price of wheat is kept low. Without these subsidies, the farmers in developing economies claim, American farmers would produce only the amount of wheat that they could sell on the open market and the global price of wheat would rise.

Which of the following, if true, most weakens the claims of the farmers in developing countries regarding the price of wheat?

Wheat that is not processed for consumption can be used for certain industrial applications.

I think open market will include both consumption and use in industrial applications.

Non-governmental buyers of wheat and wheat products are able to predict how much wheat they will need several years in advance.
The United States government offers similar subsidies to soybean farmers, though the global price of soybeans is significantly higher than that of wheat.
Other countries, such as Canada and Russia, are likely to produce more wheat if the United States were to reduce its output.

I think D is the answer. Even if the US were to reduce to production, other countries will increase, and the price will remain at the same level.

The price of sorghum, a crop for which the United States government offers no subsidies, is lower than that of wheat.

Isn't this only relevant if we know Canada and Russia would make up / more than make up the difference in the US's output drop? We cannot infer that from the question.
Re: Farmers in developing countries claim that the United States governmen   [#permalink] 09 Mar 2019, 04:38

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 39 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by