In contrast to the ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan, the

Hi Pariearth,

Both can be correct, there is a subtle difference in usage.

Both prepositions, to and with, can be used following compare. Neither is more correct than the other, but a slight distinction can be made in meaning.

To has traditionally been preferred when the similarity between two things is the point of the comparison and compare means ‘liken’: I hesitate to compare my own works to those of someone like Dickens.

With, on the other hand, suggests that the differences between two things are as important as, if not more important than, the similarities: We compared the facilities available to most city-dwellers with those available to people living in the country; to compare like with like.

My point of view:

A- In contrast to the ongoing trade imbalances with china and japan, the United states trade deficit with Mexico declined by $500 million as a result of record exports to that country - RIGHT you are comparing trade imbalances and a trade imbalance of a country and the comparaison is correct (remember: you need to compare apples with apples)
B- In contrast to ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan,the United states sold record exports to Mexico,reducing its trade deficit by $500million - You are comparing trad imbalance and a country
C- When compared with ongoing trade imbalances with china and Japan, the United states sold record exports to Mexico, reducing their trade deficit by $500 million - You are comparing trad imbalance and a country
D- Compared with ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan , the united states sold record exports to Mexico, reducing the trade deficit by $500million - You are comparing trad imbalance and a country
E- Compared to the ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan, the United states record exports to mexico caused a $500 million decline in trade deficit with that country. - You are comparing trad imbalance and a country and that country is wordy

Hope it helps!

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-
Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:
Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended meaning of this sentence is that unlike the ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan, the United States trade deficit with Mexico declined by $500 million as a result of record exports to Mexico.

Concepts tested here: Meaning + Comparison

• A comparison must always be made between similar things.
• “when” is only used to refer to a point in time.

A: Correct. This answer choice avoids the pronoun error seen in Option C, as it uses no pronouns. Further, Option A uses the phrase "In contrast to ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan", conveying the intended meaning - that unlike the ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan, the United States trade deficit with Mexico declined by $500 million as a result of record exports to Mexico. Additionally, Option A correctly compares "trade imbalances with China and Japan" with "trade deficit with Mexico".

B: This answer choice incorrectly compares "trade imbalances with China and Japan" to "the United States"; please remember, a comparison must always be made between similar things.

C: This answer choice incorrectly refers to the singular noun "the United States" with the plural noun "their". Further, Option C alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "When compared with ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan"; the use of "When" incorrectly implies that the United States sold record exports to Mexico at the time when it was compared with ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan; the intended meaning is that unlike the ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan, the United States trade deficit with Mexico declined by $500 million as a result of record exports to Mexico; please remember, "when" is only uses to refer to a point in time. Additionally, Option E incorrectly compares "trade imbalances with China and Japan" to "the United States"; please remember, a comparison must always be made between similar things.

D: This answer choice incorrectly compares "trade imbalances with China and Japan" to "the United States"; please remember, a comparison must always be made between similar things.

E: This answer choice incorrectly compares "trade imbalances with China and Japan" to "the United States record exports"; please remember, a comparison must always be made between similar things.

Hence, A is the best answer choice.

All the best!
Experts' Global Team

There is no typo here. This question is wrong according to me. You cannot compare trade deficit of japan and china with that of United states and mexico.

it should be United States' which indicates possessive form. I had to start with this damn question on my gmat powerprep and spent 4 minutes on it

+1 & Agree with u..only one question-
which is the right usage- compared with or compared to..??

First look on what I wanted to test: Idiom (in contrast to x, y), comparison, misplaced modifier

a. In contrast to ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan, the United States trade deficit with Mexico declined by $500 million as a result of record exports to that country. Correct - the comparison doesn't match exactly the idiom, so I checked for a better answer.

b. In contrast to ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan, the United States sold record exports to Mexico, reducing its trade deficit by $500 million. Wrong - illogical comparison: trade imbalances and United States

c. When compared with ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan, the United States sold record exports to Mexico, reducing their trade deficit by $500 million. Wrong - "When compared" is not idiomatic. "Reducing their trade deficit" is so appealing that it's a trap sentence.

d. Compared with ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan, the United States sold record exports to Mexico, reducing the trade deficit by $500 million. Wrong - "Compared with" is not idiomatic.

e. Compared to ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan, the United States sold record exports to Mexico caused a $500 million decline in the trade deficit of that country. Wrong - illogical comparison, same as above.

IMO A

If you ask me, there's a couple of errors that haven't been mentioned:

a. In contrast to ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan, the United States trade deficit with Mexico declined by $500 million as a result of record exports to that country.
Could be correct, although sounds complicated. It's worthwhile noticing that an "ongoing trade imbalance" is being compared to a "declining trade imbalance", so at least the comparison is apples to apples. Let's see other alternatives - CORRECT BY DISCARDING THE REST

b. In contrast to ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan, the United States sold record exports to Mexico, reducing its trade deficit by $500 million.
Firstly, I'm not sure the US can sell "record exports". You can achieve record exports, your current year's exports sales could be record, but selling record exports is misleading. Also, the first part of the comparison (the trade imbalances with China and Japan) is being compared to what the US did (selling record exports), not to another trade imbalance/balance.

c. When compared with ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan, the United States sold record exports to Mexico, reducing their trade deficit by $500 million.
When compared with sounds awful, as a general rule use "when compared to" and "in comparison with". Again the selling "record exports". Again the comparison between a trade imbalance and a record sale (apples with oranges)

d. Compared with ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan, the United States sold record exports to Mexico, reducing the trade deficit by $500 million.
Again "with" instead of "to". Also, again apples and oranges. And yet again, "selling records"

e. Compared to ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan, the United States sold record exports to Mexico caused a $500 million decline in the trade deficit of that country.
Now the "to" is correct, but it's now missing a "the" -> "Compared to the ongoing trade imbalances...". Also, again "selling records" and "apples and oranges".

So, despite being a tricky phrase, A) is still the most correct.

Moreover, I find that country ambiguous. Unless one knows what trade deficit means, it is difficult to determine whether that country refers to United States or to Mexico. I also have serious doubt about the usage imbalances with China and Japan ; imbalances between China and Japan would probably be better.

The intended meaning here is that the trade imbalance with china and the imbalance with Japan were enlarging while the imbalance with Mexico declined due to record exports. Otherwise, the contrast will not hold water in the given context. Therefore, the trade imbalance of the US with other countries is under consideration here and not the trade imbalances between China and Japan, which is of no importance to the US.
Secondly, when exports hit the roof to a particular country, the imbalance with that county alone goes down. Therefore, as the text has indicated, the imbalance with Mexico has declined, implying that the exports to Mexico drove the imbalances down and not to some other country, be it Japan or China.

Takeaway: The intended meaning may not be explicit in higher level meaning –based questions.

A. Correct.
B. "Trade imbalances" are incorrectly compared to a country.
C. "Trade imbalances" are incorrectly compared to a country.
D. "Trade imbalances" are incorrectly compared to a country.
E. B. "Trade imbalances" are incorrectly compared to "record exports" instead of other trade deficits.

It is common that the trade deficit of a particular country with another country will shrink when exports to that another country go up. Here the exporter is the US and the importer is Mexico. Therefore, exports to 'that' country will only mean exports to Mexico; After all, can the US have a trade deficit with itself?

Why is there no " 'S " in choice A --- "the United State's trade deficit" (please notice " 's ").

Please help on this.

It would definitely be wrong to write "the United State's" here, since the country's full name is "the United States" with an "s" on the end. (Similar: if we're trying to say that some weirdo named Charles has a huge appetite, it would be wrong to refer to "Charle's huge appetite.")

Beyond that: well, there's some grey area with the possessive here, but it's completely irrelevant on the GMAT. The GMAT will never test you on the correct placement of an apostrophe for a possessive noun that already ends in "s." The GMAT really doesn't care if you'd write "Charles's amazing appetite" (correct), "Charles' amazing appetite" (often considered incorrect a generation ago, but generally accepted now), or "Charle's amazing appetite" (definitely wrong). The test has more important things to worry about.

If we're talking about the trade deficit of the United States, though, we have a funny habit of omitting the apostrophe completely. I'm not sure why we do that, to be honest. We would talk about "Mexico's economy" (with an apostrophe to indicate that "Mexico" is possessive) or "the Mexican economy" (with "Mexican" functioning as an adjective), but we tend to just say "the United States economy" or "the United States trade deficit." Technically, an apostrophe would be fine for those last two, but we tend to omit it.

But again: this isn't anything to worry about, since it's not ever going to be a deciding factor on a GMAT question.

I hope this helps!

The structure here is: In contrast to X, Y...

Keep in mind that X and Y must be comparable. A is the only correct answer if you apply this rule. ("the ongoing trade imbalances with China and Japan" and "the U.S. trade deficit with Mexico" are comparable)

Moreover, "When compared with" and "Compared with" are awkward. "Compared to" is acceptable but in this case, E is wrong.

I am unable to find subject-verb pair in this sentence.
Correct ans A seems a fragment to me.. so I rejected it.
Please explain is it not necessary for every sentence to have at least one independent clause in GMAT.
Thanks

Hi Pallavi, of course every complete sentence must have at least one Independent clause. In option A, following is the Independent clause (with declined being the main verb)

the United States trade deficit with Mexico declined by $500 million as a result of record exports to that country.

p.s. Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses Clauses, their application and examples in significant detail. If someone is interested, PM me your email-id; I can mail the corresponding section.

Is'nt declined a verb-ed modifier.
"United States trade deficit is declined" ---> make sense --> therefore modifier
"United States trade deficit declined something" --> doesnot make sense --> therefore not a verb

Please explain