Hi everyone,
Got 3/4 correct in 10 minutes, including 3:50 minutes to read and 6:10 minutes to answer the questions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------P1In paragraph one the author talks about to approaches to privatization adopted by ex communists countries. Gradual privatization is not favored by the author and one approach to rapid privatization also has some problems according to the author.
Purpose: To present 2 approaches to privatization, considering the drawbacks associated.
P2In paragraph 2 the author presents the second approach to rapid privatization, that is to give vouchers to employees. Then the author presents 2 critics to such practice and refutes them.
Purpose: to present and refute 2 critics to the second approach to rapid privatization.
Main pointTo discuss 3 approaches to privatization and choose one (giving vouchers to employees) as the best one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1. Which of the following is NOT mentioned in the passage as a possible adverse consequence of rapid privatization?
Pre-thinking
Detail question
From P1: However, gradual privatization would only prolong the core problems of
inefficiency and misallocation of both labor and capital.
(A) Undue prolongation of inefficiency and misallocation
(B) Loss of ownership in domestic private enterprises to foreign concerns
mentioned in P2(C) Financial devastation for employees of private enterprises
Mentioned in P1(D) Inequitable distribution of wealth among employees of various enterprises
Mentioned in P1(E) Instability in stock prices
Mentioned in P22. Which of the following would the author probably agree is the LEAST desirable outcome of economic reform in formerly Communist countries?
Pre-thinking
Inference question
To answer the question we need to understand the goal of such countries.
The aim of such country is to give more opportunities and more possessions to people.
(A) Effective allocation of labor
From P1: However, gradual privatization would only prolong the core problems of
inefficiency and misallocation of both labor and capital.
This effect is desired(B) Equitable distribution of property among citizens
Of course(C) Financial security of citizens
Can be inferred from P1 because if to achieve the goal of privatization shares are given to employees, clearly such approach aims at increasing financial security(D) Equal opportunity for financial success among citizens
Can be inferred from the last sentence of the passage.(E) Financial security of private enterprises
Among the options mentioned this is the least desirable.
3. In responding to those “skeptics” who claim that people will sell their vouchers to foreign capitalists (Highlighted), the author implies that
Pre-thinking
Assumption question
[b]The author assumes that their reasoning is wrong first because they think that such employees will not retain their vouchers and second because such critics address the wrong aspect af the approach.
[/b]
(A) foreign capitalists will not be willing to pay a fair price for the vouchers. Out of scope
(B) the future flow of income is likely in many cases to exceed the present exchange value of a voucher.
Yes, probably employees will retain their vouchers for some reason and this option gives us that reason.
(C) foreign investment in a nation’s enterprises may adversely affect currency exchange rates.
Out of scope
(D) although the skeptics are correct, their point is irrelevant in evaluating the merits of voucher privatization.
This is the classic example of an half correct/half wrong question. The author never thinks that the critics are correct.
(E) foreign capitalists are less interested in the success of voucher privatization than in making a profit.
out of scope
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4. Which of the following is LEAST accurate in characterizing the author’s method of argumentation in discussing the significance of falling stock prices (Text in Red)?
Pre-thinking
Let's deconstruct the portion of the passage that is of interest to the question.
Some critics charge that voucher holders would not be interested in how their enterprises are managed, as may be true of small corporate shareholders in capitalist countries who pay little attention to their investments until the corporation’s profits fail to meet expectations, at which time these shareholders rush to sell their securities.
Here we are given the substance of the critic: employees do not care of vouchers and behave like some other people who when stock prices are falling rush to sell their shares.
While the resulting fall in stock prices can cause serious problems for a corporation, it is this very pressure that drives private firms toward efficiency and profitability.
Here the author expresses a contrast by claiming that: "Yes, what you critics say is correct. That happens. But there is more to what you are claiming. This pressure many times drives companies to be profitable and efficient."
So per the author there is some positive aspect associated to what the critics consider negative. Hence the author turns the critic into something positive.
(A) Describing a paradox that supports the author’s position
No paradox(B) Asserting that one drawback of an approach is outweighed by countervailing considerations
per the author there is no draw back actually(C) Rebutting an opposing position by suggesting an alternative explanation
Correct, the author sees the scenario that critics discuss in a different, more positive light.(D) Discrediting an opposing argument by questioning its relevance
The author does not question the relevance.(E) Characterizing an argument against a course of action instead as an argument in its favor
out of scope
close
04 Apr 2020, 09:30
45%
(medium)
40%
(02:59) wrong 
