Bunuel wrote:
In each of the past four years, the percent increase of the profits of Japan’s five largest semiconductor firms has been less than that of the year before. This trend marks a severe departure from the industry’s peak in 1993, when revenues of each of these five firms grew at an average annual rate of 47 percent since the beginning of the decade. Clearly, the trade deficit law enacted by the Japanese government in 1993 has had an adverse effect on the industry, which accounts for a large portion of the Japanese gross domestic product.
The conclusion of the argument above cannot be true unless which of the following is true?
A. Japan’s gross domestic product has also shrunk since 1993.
B. The original goal of most trade-deficit laws is to protect domestic products from cheaper imports, yet not every one achieves this goal.
C. The five companies mentioned have encountered new pressure from smaller companies that hold patents on newer semiconductor technology.
D. Profits of semiconductor companies would have kept climbing steadily if the government had not passed its 1993 trade-deficit bill.
E. Many other sectors of Japanese commerce, such as its auto industry, have also suffered declining profits since 1993.
Project CR Butler: Critical Reasoning
For all CR butler Questions Click Here- Top 5 Software company's growth was rising steadily. Govt brought trade deficit law in 1993. Since then profits have been declining steadily.
Conclusion - Trade deficit law led to decline in profits of top 5 companies
Question type -
StrengthenA. Japan’s gross domestic product has also shrunk since 1993. --> T
his means that economy was on decline. During such period of overall economy decline, most of sectors go through decline. So, may be that was the reason of decline of profits of these 5 companies. So, trade deficit might not have been the reason for this decline in profit --WrongB. The original goal of most trade-deficit laws is to protect domestic products from cheaper imports, yet not every one achieves this goal. -->
trade deficit law protects domestic products. That means Japans indegenous software companies must benefit from this. But they did not. So there might have been another reason for decline rather than the law. --> Wrong
C. The five companies mentioned have encountered new pressure from smaller companies that hold patents on newer semiconductor technology. -->
new companies gave them competition. This may be another reason for decline. So, trade deficit law was not the likely cause --> WrongD. Profits of semiconductor companies would have kept climbing steadily if the government had not passed its 1993 trade-deficit bill. -->
This is what is needed to strengthen the argument. So, if govt had not passed the law, the profits would have kept climbing steadily. That means, trade deficit bill was the reason. This strengthens the argument ---> CORRECTE. Many other sectors of Japanese commerce, such as its auto industry, have also suffered declining profits since 1993. -->
Other sectors also declined. So, there might have another reason. Trade deficit law was not the reason ---> Wrong
28 Jan 2022, 01:30
45%
(medium)
67%
(02:08)
correct 
close
