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

It is currently 19 Jun 2018, 05:06

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed

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

Hide Tags

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 01 Mar 2014
Posts: 130
Schools: Tepper '18
Re: Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Apr 2016, 00:56
KissGMAT wrote:
I Still feel D should be the answer.

D. Buying unprocessed cashews at lower than world market prices enables cashew
processors in Kernland to sell processed nuts at competitive prices.

This scenerio is helping both farmers and processing units ( thus improving urban employment)


The conclusion is - removing tariff would seriously hamper the government's effort to reduce urban unemployment.

D - talks about urban processing plants and how they benefit if the tariffs are imposed - but nothing is said about alternate possible reasons for urban unemployment.
We need to weaken the argument that - if the tariffs are removed urban unemployment would increase. This can only be done if there is a situation where urban unemployment would increase even if the the tariffs are imposed.
option E talks about a scenario where tariffs are imposed and the farmers are moving to cities (due to loses) and hence creating an added pressure on the urban employment opportunities available. Thus increasing urban unemployment.

Hope this helps.
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 26 Jan 2015
Posts: 90
Re: Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Apr 2016, 08:31
Argument says: No Tariff ----> Not good. => Tariff ---> Good.
C says: Number of farmers are more than factory workers. Imagine a condition in which farmers=1001 and workers = 1000. In this case, the argument still holds good.
D says: Tariff ----> Good. D is basically strengthening the argument.
E says: Tariff ---> Not Good. Will drive more people into the city. (Chances of being employed are high) - In the opposite direction to the conclusion.
Hence E is the best weakener.
_________________

Kudos is the best way to say Thank you! Please give me a kudos if you like my post

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Sep 2015
Posts: 105
Re: Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 May 2016, 19:20
could mods update the question stem to remove the answer?
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 09 Jul 2016
Posts: 2
Re: Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Jul 2016, 22:15
I chose C.

We can't make the assumption that removing the tariff will negatively affect the number of processing plant jobs without also assuming that it will positively affect the number of farming jobs.

If more people are 'farmers' vs 'processors', then removing the tariff will benefit more people and the new jobs created will outweigh the loss of jobs.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 13 Jun 2016
Posts: 129
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Technology
Re: Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Aug 2016, 09:55
Wow, took me 10 minutes to finally understand this problem. C and D are good contenders if you don't read this question carefully. the last sentence is suggesting that tariff -> lower urban unemployment but E directly attacks that and says that tariff -> higher urban unemployment because they are moving into those cities without jobs. D is actually a strengthener to be because the tariff is helping a certain group of people that otherwise would not have.

This is definitely a GMAT type question, hopefully will see though it on test day!
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 01 Sep 2016
Posts: 98
Re: Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Sep 2016, 08:00
Aaah....okay...finally was able to get this...
Thanks for sharing the reasoning...[

quote="chandru42"]Argument: removing the tariff would seriously hamper the government's effort to reduce urban unemployment over the next five years.

how to weaken the above argument?
by Proving:
tariff
=> do not reduce urban unemployment
=> increase the urban unemployment

E) A lack of profitable crops is driving an increasing number of small farmers in Kernland off their land and into the cities.
==> Because of tariff, farmers are moving to urban areas and are increasing the unemployment figures of urban

Got this explanation from another thread[/quote]
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 01 Sep 2016
Posts: 98
Re: Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Sep 2016, 08:08
< Simplest way to put it..
Govt thinks..if TARIIF is KEPT, umpleymont would be solved in URBAN area
Howver, if TARIFF is there, Rural ppl will be going to URBAN AREAS and adding to their Unemplyment <Opposite of what is being thought > !!

abhishek03050 wrote:
Aaah....okay...finally was able to get this...
Thanks for sharing the reasoning...[

quote="chandru42"]Argument: removing the tariff would seriously hamper the government's effort to reduce urban unemployment over the next five years.

how to weaken the above argument?
by Proving:
tariff
=> do not reduce urban unemployment
=> increase the urban unemployment

E) A lack of profitable crops is driving an increasing number of small farmers in Kernland off their land and into the cities.
==> Because of tariff, farmers are moving to urban areas and are increasing the unemployment figures of urban

Got this explanation from another thread
[/quote]
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 05 Jun 2016
Posts: 26
Re: Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Oct 2016, 23:38
To discuss (C):

suppose there are 100 farmers and 50 processors. Lifting the tariff will make it difficult for domestic processors to buy cashews at world market prices (w.m.p). Thus, this may increase urban unemployment (presumably farmers don't live in urban areas). But this will benefit the economy as a whole since there are more farmers than processors. (but the conclusion focuses on lowering urban unemployment)

On the other hand, imposing tariffs will force farmers to sell to domestic processors. This may decrease urban unemployment or it may also increase urban unemployment, since small farmers (those who cant compete with big farmers) are forced to move into the city to find work (which is what (E) says.

On these grounds, eliminate (C).
Intern
Intern
User avatar
B
Joined: 13 Apr 2017
Posts: 4
Location: Portugal
Concentration: General Management, Economics
WE: General Management (Retail)
Re: Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Jun 2017, 10:21
acer2knight wrote:
But isnt "A lack of profitable crops" too generic...the argument here talks about cashew nuts and not crops in generic. Am I thinking too much??

Between C and E. Due to this reason my pick was C.


Exactly the same here. Although there is a generic lack of profitable crops, that doesn't necessarily mean the same occurs for cashew crops. That's why I also chose C. In CR questions can we assume that answer choices don't have this sort of "traps", e.g. can we assume that "crops" include for sure "cashew crops" as well?

Thanks
Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 03 May 2017
Posts: 108
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Jun 2017, 15:25
mikedays wrote:
acer2knight wrote:
But isnt "A lack of profitable crops" too generic...the argument here talks about cashew nuts and not crops in generic. Am I thinking too much??

Between C and E. Due to this reason my pick was C.


Exactly the same here. Although there is a generic lack of profitable crops, that doesn't necessarily mean the same occurs for cashew crops. That's why I also chose C. In CR questions can we assume that answer choices don't have this sort of "traps", e.g. can we assume that "crops" include for sure "cashew crops" as well?

Thanks


Hi Mikedays,

IMO, it helps if you don't take the questions too literally. I guess it depends on context, but in this case, we can assume that cashew is the crop because the question is focused on tariffs and unemployment. It probably helps to practice more of the OG as well, as this can help with the familiarity with the different contexts, for example, such specificities might be less relevant in bold faced CRs. Best.
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 30 Mar 2016
Posts: 47
Re: Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Jul 2017, 07:04
Hi all,

Argument = [remove tariff] --> [hamper the effort to reduce unemployment]

CAUSE = [remove tariff]

EFFECT = [hamper the effort to reduce unemployment]

One way to WEAKEN the above argument is to show that THE EFFECT STILL OCCURS WHEN THE CAUSE DID NOT OCCUR.

Option E shows that even if the tariff is NOT removed, there would be unemployment. This is because when the tariff is NOT removed, farmers are NOT profiting anymore. Thus, they move to cities and become unemployed.

Just my 2 cents :)
VP
VP
User avatar
P
Status: Learning
Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Posts: 1160
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V36
GRE 1: 314 Q157 V157
GPA: 3.4
WE: Manufacturing and Production (Manufacturing)
CAT Tests
Re: Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Jul 2017, 10:12
Imo E

The reason sighted for the high tariff on exports of unprocessed cashew is that the government wants to lower unemployment in urban areas whey majority of the processing plants are situated .
But what will happen if the farmers move to urban areas in search of better opportunities because they are not getting commensurate prices for their produce than they plan of the government is faulty as it is going to increase unemployment .
Option E is the correct answer .
_________________

Please give kudos if you found my answers useful

Verbal Forum Moderator
avatar
B
Joined: 13 Feb 2015
Posts: 707
Premium Member
Re: Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jul 2017, 10:44
Merged topics. Please, search before posting questions!
_________________

Please Read: Verbal Posting Rules

Re: Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed   [#permalink] 15 Jul 2017, 10:44

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   [ 53 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed

  post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

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

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.