|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
26 Aug 2023, 06:29
Kudos
Bookmarks
kittle
Take an example:
US made import relief laws (say a huge tax on imports) to ensure that its own companies (US companies) benefit.
Nike is a US company but say it manufactures its shoes in another country C and brings them to US to sell.
Adidas is a German company but say it manufactures its shoes in US itself for US customers.
Nike shoes are imported into US from C so Adidas could claim that this import is harming it and that Nike received subsidies from the country C govt to manufacture in C, then Nike's products could attract the heavy tax.
Finally, Nike, the US company, suffered because Adidas (a foreign company) took advantage of US's import relief laws.
05 Sep 2023, 04:11
Kudos
Bookmarks
GMATNinja can you please explain question 3?
Got down to options C and E but went with E since the author does mention a bizzare and exceptional case, whereas in the previous paragraph he mentions the reverse.
Got down to options C and E but went with E since the author does mention a bizzare and exceptional case, whereas in the previous paragraph he mentions the reverse.
13 Dec 2023, 09:39
Kudos
Bookmarks
Question 3
Shane04
To understand the purpose of the last paragraph, first think through the structure of the passage as a whole:
- Paragraph 1: The author introduces an "unfortunate" situation. He/she doesn't like that companies frequently seek legal protection from import competition.
- Paragraph 2: The author gives a reason of why it is "unfortunate": international companies are so complex that import protection hurts more companies than it helps.
- Paragraph 3: The author further explains why import protection is "unfortunate": foreign companies can use the laws against US companies.
- Paragraph 4: The author give an example of the issue discussed in paragraph 3: A Dutch company operating in the US used the laws against a US company operating in Canada.
From this, we can see that the author is unhappy about the use of import protection laws. The second and third paragraphs explain issues with these laws, and the last paragraph gives us an example of the why the laws are not great.
Take another look at (C):
Quote:
Remember, the author thinks these laws stink. He/she expects them to harm more than they help. The example in the last paragraph goes along with that expectation: a US company ends up getting hurt.
Yes, the author does say that it is a "bizarre" case -- but it's bizarre because the laws are absurd, exactly as the author argued earlier in the passage. Because the example in paragraph 4 goes along with the author's argument, it's incorrect to say that it's "case in which the results expected by the author of the passage were not obtained."
(C) is out for question 3.
Here's (E):
Quote:
This is what we're looking for! The fourth paragraph provides an example of the issues discussed in the third paragraph.
(E) is the correct answer to question 3.
I hope that helps!
