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

It is currently 15 Oct 2018, 04:28

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

Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods

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

Hide Tags

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 652
Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Apr 2008, 05:44
9
46
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  65% (hard)

Question Stats:

58% (01:52) correct 42% (02:21) wrong based on 2591 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods when the Darfir Republic's currency, the pundra, was weak: its value was unusually low relative to the world's most stable currencies. Both times a weak pundra made Darfir's manufactured products a bargain on world markets, and Darfir's exports were up substantially. Now some politicians are saying that, in order to cause another similarly sized increase in exports, the government should allow the pundra to become weak again.

Which of the following, if true, provides the government with the strongest grounds to doubt that the politicians' recommendation, if followed, will achieve its aim?

(A) Several of the politicians now recommending that the pundra be allowed to become weak made that same recommendation before each of the last two periods of currency weakness.

(B) After several decades of operating well below peak capacity, Darfir's manufacturing sector is now operating at near-peak levels.

(C) The economy of a country experiencing a rise in exports will become healthier only if the country's currency is strong or the rise in exports is significant.

(D) Those countries whose manufactured products compete with Darfir's on the world market all currently have stable currencies.

(E) A sharp improvement in the efficiency of Darfir's manufacturing plants would make Darfir's products a bargain on world markets even without any weakening of the pundra relative to other currencies.

(B) The country won't be able to meet the increased demand for goods if its factories are already operating at a peak. Hence no increase in revenue from exports.
Most Helpful Expert Reply
Manhattan Prep Instructor
User avatar
Joined: 30 Apr 2012
Posts: 793
Re: Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Jul 2012, 12:00
14
5
maybeam wrote:
Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods when the Darfir Republic's currency, the pundra, was weak: its value was unusually low relative to the world's most stable currencies. Both times a weak pundra made Darfir's manufactured products a bargain on world markets, and Darfir's exports were up substantially. Now some politicians are saying that, in order to cause another similarly sized increase in exports, the government should allow the pundra to become weak again.

Which of the following, if true, provides the government with the strongest grounds to doubt that the politicians' recommendation, if followed, will achieve its aim?

(A) Several of the politicians now recommending that the pundra be allowed to become weak made that same recommendation before each of the last two periods of currency weakness.
(B) After several decades of operating well below peak capacity, Darfir's manufacturing sector is now operating at near-peak levels.
(C) The economy of a country experiencing a rise in exports will become healthier only if the country's currency is strong or the rise in exports is significant.
(D) Those countries whose manufactured products compete with Darfir's on the world market all currently have stable currencies.
(E) A sharp improvement in the efficiency of Darfir's manufacturing plants would make Darfir's products a bargain on world markets even without any weakening of the pundra relative to other currencies.


Quote:
to me the essence of the given argument is little unclear.
further if someone could also explain why OA is the logical answer, it would be very helpful


The argument states that during periods of weak currency (lower value vs other countries), Darfir experience a sharp INCREASE in exports. Politicians are suggesting that the country intentionally weaken the currency so Darfir can experience a similar INCREASE in exports.

The correct answer to this 'weaken' question needs to ATTACK a necessary assumption to the politicians plan.

A-If anything, this answer strengthens the position of the politicians
B-This answer choice (correct) states that manufacturing is already at peak levels. That means that even if the currency become devalued and demand for products increases, Darfir would not be able to increase manufacturing to meet that demand. The conclusion of the politicians is completely weakened (if not destroyed). [Note: the assumption you are attacking here is as follows: Politicians are assuming that Darfir is able to increase production to meet the increase in demand that would result from a devalued currency.]
C-Out of scope answer
D-Out of scope (or perhaps even a little strengthening)
E-Out of scope

KW
_________________


Kyle Widdison | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | Utah


Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Course Reviews | View Instructor Profile



Most Helpful Community Reply
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 14 Dec 2012
Posts: 774
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Operations
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.6
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Aug 2013, 11:21
17
1
veenu08 wrote:
maybeam wrote:
Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods when the Darfir Republic's currency, the pundra, was weak: its value was unusually low relative to the world's most stable currencies. Both times a weak pundra made Darfir's manufactured products a bargain on world markets, and Darfir's exports were up substantially. Now some politicians are saying that, in order to cause another similarly sized increase in exports, the government should allow the pundra to become weak again.

Which of the following, if true, provides the government with the strongest grounds to doubt that the politicians' recommendation, if followed, will achieve its aim?

(A) Several of the politicians now recommending that the pundra be allowed to become weak made that same recommendation before each of the last two periods of currency weakness.
(B) After several decades of operating well below peak capacity, Darfir's manufacturing sector is now operating at near-peak levels.
(C) The economy of a country experiencing a rise in exports will become healthier only if the country's currency is strong or the rise in exports is significant.
(D) Those countries whose manufactured products compete with Darfir's on the world market all currently have stable currencies.
(E) A sharp improvement in the efficiency of Darfir's manufacturing plants would make Darfir's products a bargain on world markets even without any weakening of the pundra relative to other currencies.


Quote:
to me the essence of the given argument is little unclear.
further if someone could also explain why OA is the logical answer, it would be very helpful


Can someone please explain me how E is incorrect?

Isnt it of the form cause and effect.

As per the argument -- weakening of pundra causes Darfir's manufactured exports to rise. In E option its giving another cause for the same effect. So cant it weaken the argument?

Regards,
Veenu


THAT IS NOT A WEAKENER.

see one example:

by drinking milk one can become healthy.

what is conclusion: drink milk will result you in good health.
does this says that drinking milk is the only way to make good health?..answer is NO.

now if you say by eating fruits one can become healthy.==>does this weaken above statement.? NO

only way to weaken is by showing that by drinking milk we are not GOING to achieve good heslth.

now see orginal problem.:
politician say =>decrease pundra==>increase bargain==>increase export

so you cant weaken by saying that
increase production of industries ==>increase bargain==>increase export

compare with above given example.

hope it helps
_________________

When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe ...then you will be successfull....

GIVE VALUE TO OFFICIAL QUESTIONS...



GMAT RCs VOCABULARY LIST: http://gmatclub.com/forum/vocabulary-list-for-gmat-reading-comprehension-155228.html
learn AWA writing techniques while watching video : http://www.gmatprepnow.com/module/gmat-analytical-writing-assessment
: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APt9ITygGss

General Discussion
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 10 Jun 2007
Posts: 1376
Re: Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 08 Apr 2008, 19:39
4
2
prasannar wrote:
Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods when the Darfir Republic's currency, the pundra, was weak: its value was unusually low relative to the world's most stable currencies. Both times a weak pundra made Darfir's manufactured products a bargain on world markets, and Darfir's exports were up substantially. Now some politicians are saying that, in order to cause another similarly sized increase in exports, the government should allow the pundra to become weak again.
Which of the following, if true, provides the government with the strongest grounds to doubt that the politicians' recommendation, if followed, will achieve its aim?

(A) Several of the politicians now recommending that the pundra be allowed to become weak made that same recommendation before each of the last two periods of currency weakness.
(B) After several decades of operating well below peak capacity, Darfir's manufacturing sector is now operating at near-peak levels.
The country won't be able to meet the increased demand for goods if its factories are already operating at a peak. Hence no increase in revenue from exports.
(C) The economy of a country experiencing a rise in exports will become healthier only if the country's currency is strong or the rise in exports is significant.
(D) Those countries whose manufactured products compete with Darfir's on the world market all currently have stable currencies.
(E) A sharp improvement in the efficiency of Darfir's manufacturing plants would make Darfir's products a bargain on world markets even without any weakening of the pundra relative to other currencies.


I got B, and after reading some posts, I notice that it talks about revenue. However, I still think it is the best choice. Since there is no more manufacturing capacity, weakening the currency won't help; thus, government can doubt the plan.

Argument here is that weakening currency ->increased export, and we have to prove that this plan will NOT work.

A. This strengthens the argument, if at all.
C. Strong currency OR significant rise in export -> healthy economy. This argument do not relate anything to the main argument. I feel that this is irrelevant as it doesn't prove that the plan won't work.
D. Irrelevant. Not talking about strength of currency here.
E. This is also irrelevant. We are not talking about efficiency of plants. This only gives an alternative to weaken currency method and it does not prove that the politicians won't achieve their aim.

Originally posted by bkk145 on 08 Apr 2008, 19:37.
Last edited by bkk145 on 08 Apr 2008, 19:39, edited 1 time in total.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 24 Apr 2008
Posts: 1
Re: Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Apr 2008, 04:40
4
1
The right answer is B.

If your country is already operating at near peak production capacity, whats the point of trying to raise exports if you cant produce anymore?
GMAT Tutor
avatar
S
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 1330
Re: Darfir CR  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Sep 2010, 10:45
1
1
joemama142000 wrote:
Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods when the Darfir Republic's currency, the pundra, was weak: its value was unusually low relative to the world's most stable currencies. Both times a weak pundra made Darfir's manufactured products a bargain on world markets, and Darfir's exports were up substantially. Now, some politicans are saying that in order to cause another similarily sized increase in exports, the government should allow the pundra to become weak again.

Which of the following if true provides the government with the strongest grounds to doubt the politician's recommendation, if followed will achieve its aim?

A) Several of the politicians now recommending that the pundra be allowed to beomce weak made that same recommendation before each of the last two periods of currency weakness

B) After several decades of operating well below peak capacity, Darfir's manufacturing sector is now near peak levels

C) The economy of a country experiencing a rise in exports will become healthier only if the country's currency is strong or the rise in exports significant

D) Those countries whos manufacturing products compete with Darfir's on the world market all have stable currencies

E) A sharp improvement in the efficiency of Darfir's manufacturing plants would make Darfir's products a baragain on world markets even without any weakening of the pundtra relative to other currencies



This is quite a typical format for a GMAT CR question: we learn that something worked in the past (in this question, weakening the currency), and the argument suggests it will work again. That might be a good argument if the situation now is identical to the situation in the past. But, if anything important has changed, what worked before might not work now. If you know that you're looking for an answer choice which describes something that has fundamentally changed since the last time the currency was weakened, then answer B here should 'jump off the page' as the correct answer: now, unlike before, there is no room to increase exports.
_________________

GMAT Tutor in Toronto

If you are looking for online GMAT math tutoring, or if you are interested in buying my advanced Quant books and problem sets, please contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
P
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 8381
Location: Pune, India
Re: Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Jan 2012, 03:31
7
madGMAT wrote:
Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods when Darfir Republic's currency, the pundra, was weak: its value was unusually low relative to the world's most stable currencies. Both times a weak pundra made Darfir's manufactured products a bargain on the world markets, and Darfir's exports were up substantially. Now some politicians are saying that, in order to cause another similarly sized increase in exports, the government should allow the pundra to become weak again.

Which of the following if true provides the government with the strongest grounds to doubt the politican's recommendation, if followed, will achieve its aim?
a) Several of the politicians no recommending that the pundra be allowed to become weak made that same recommendation before each of the last two periods of currency weakness.
b) After several decades of operating well below its peak capcity, darfir's manufacturing sector is now operating at near-peak levels
c) the economy of a country experiencing a rise in exports will become healthier only if the country's currency is strong or the rise in exports is significant.
d) those countries whose manufactured products compete with darfir's on the world market currently all have stable currencies
e) a sharp improvement in the efficiency of darfir's manufacturing plants would make darfir's products a bargain on the world markets even without weakening of the pundra relative to other currencies.

Can someone explain???


It is a 'weaken the plan' question.

What is the plan?
Plan: When currency weakens, exports increase. (Foreigners can buy more using same amount of their currencies so they buy more.) Therefore, in order to cause [highlight]another similarly sized increase in exports[/highlight], the government should allow the pundra to become weak again.

Focus on the highlighted words. The aim is to cause a similarly sized increase in exports. That is what the plan is trying to achieve. On weaken questions, we focus on the conclusion. What the plan is trying to achieve is parallel to conclusion. So we focus on trying to weaken what the plan is trying to achieve. We need to find something that tells us why we will not get a similarly sized increase in exports even if we weaken pundra.

Options a, c, d and e do not talk about the reasons we will not see similarly sized increase in exports.
Option B tells us that darfir's manufacturing sector is now operating at near-peak levels. If this is true, exports cannot increase much because darfir cannot manufacture more than it is manufacturing now. If there are no extra products manufactured, there cannot be extra exports. In previous instances, darfir was manufacturing below capacity so they could manufacture extra products. Hence the plan worked in those instances but this time it may not. Therefore, option (B) is correct.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >

GMAT self-study has never been more personalized or more fun. Try ORION Free!

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 17 Sep 2011
Posts: 12
Re: Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Jul 2012, 16:47
2
If you are doubtful between B and E. Here is the way out. B and E both weakens the argument. But if see closely , even if E works, we still cannot counter argument. We need to choose an option which harms the plan in some way.


maybeam wrote:
Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods when the Darfir Republic's currency, the pundra, was weak: its value was unusually low relative to the world's most stable currencies. Both times a weak pundra made Darfir's manufactured products a bargain on world markets, and Darfir's exports were up substantially. Now some politicians are saying that, in order to cause another similarly sized increase in exports, the government should allow the pundra to become weak again.

Which of the following, if true, provides the government with the strongest grounds to doubt that the politicians' recommendation, if followed, will achieve its aim?

(A) Several of the politicians now recommending that the pundra be allowed to become weak made that same recommendation before each of the last two periods of currency weakness.
(B) After several decades of operating well below peak capacity, Darfir's manufacturing sector is now operating at near-peak levels.
(C) The economy of a country experiencing a rise in exports will become healthier only if the country's currency is strong or the rise in exports is significant.
(D) Those countries whose manufactured products compete with Darfir's on the world market all currently have stable currencies.
(E) A sharp improvement in the efficiency of Darfir's manufacturing plants would make Darfir's products a bargain on world markets even without any weakening of the pundra relative to other currencies.


Quote:
to me the essence of the given argument is little unclear.
further if someone could also explain why OA is the logical answer, it would be very helpful
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 31 Mar 2013
Posts: 54
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Re: Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Aug 2013, 11:03
maybeam wrote:
Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods when the Darfir Republic's currency, the pundra, was weak: its value was unusually low relative to the world's most stable currencies. Both times a weak pundra made Darfir's manufactured products a bargain on world markets, and Darfir's exports were up substantially. Now some politicians are saying that, in order to cause another similarly sized increase in exports, the government should allow the pundra to become weak again.

Which of the following, if true, provides the government with the strongest grounds to doubt that the politicians' recommendation, if followed, will achieve its aim?

(A) Several of the politicians now recommending that the pundra be allowed to become weak made that same recommendation before each of the last two periods of currency weakness.
(B) After several decades of operating well below peak capacity, Darfir's manufacturing sector is now operating at near-peak levels.
(C) The economy of a country experiencing a rise in exports will become healthier only if the country's currency is strong or the rise in exports is significant.
(D) Those countries whose manufactured products compete with Darfir's on the world market all currently have stable currencies.
(E) A sharp improvement in the efficiency of Darfir's manufacturing plants would make Darfir's products a bargain on world markets even without any weakening of the pundra relative to other currencies.


Quote:
to me the essence of the given argument is little unclear.
further if someone could also explain why OA is the logical answer, it would be very helpful


Can someone please explain me how E is incorrect?

Isnt it of the form cause and effect.

As per the argument -- weakening of pundra causes Darfir's manufactured exports to rise. In E option its giving another cause for the same effect. So cant it weaken the argument?

Regards,
Veenu
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 12 May 2013
Posts: 16
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Aug 2013, 15:53
1
The answer is B guys.

E would have been a valid option if it was a weaken question.
The question is talking about undermining the politician recommendation.

Sent from my GT-N7105 using Tapatalk 2
Director
Director
User avatar
B
Joined: 03 Feb 2013
Posts: 875
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Strategy
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V44
GPA: 3.88
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Reviews Badge
Re: Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Jun 2014, 08:35
2
Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods when the Darfir Republic’s currency, the pundra, was weak: its value was unusually low relative to the world’s most stable currencies. Both times a weak pundra made Darfir’s manufactured products a bargain on world markets, and Darfir’s exports were up substantially. Now some politicians are saying that, in order to cause another similarly sized increase in exports, the government should allow the pundra to become weak again.

Which of the following, if true, provides the government with the strongest grounds to doubt that the politicians’ recommendation, if followed, will achieve its aim?"

A) Several of the politicians now recommending that the pundra be allowed to become weak made that same recommendation before each of the last two periods of currency weakness - How does it affect the argument? - Out of scope.

B) After several decades of operating well below peak capacity, Darfir’s manufacturing sector is now operating at near-peak levels. - Correct
If the manufacturing sector is at the peak levels and if the currency is allowed to drop compared to the other currencies, the manufacturing sector will not be able to support the extra demand which is generated and the plan will fail.


C) The economy of a country experiencing a rise in exports will become healthier only if the country’s currency is strong or the rise in exports is significant.
We are not talking about making the economy healthier.

D) Those countries whose manufactured products compete with Darfir’s on the world market all currently have stable currencies.
- Supports the argument.

E) A sharp improvement in the efficiency of Darfir’s manufacturing plants would make Darfir’s products a bargain on world markets even without any weakening of the pundra relative to other currencies. - Alternate reasoning to make the Dafir's Product popular but we need to find an option that makes the plan fail.
_________________

Thanks,
Kinjal
My Debrief : http://gmatclub.com/forum/hardwork-never-gets-unrewarded-for-ever-189267.html#p1449379
My Application Experience : http://gmatclub.com/forum/hardwork-never-gets-unrewarded-for-ever-189267-40.html#p1516961
Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/in/kinjal-das/

Please click on Kudos, if you think the post is helpful

Manhattan Prep Instructor
User avatar
Joined: 30 Apr 2012
Posts: 793
Re: Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Apr 2016, 05:41
Weaken the argument questions rely heavily on your ability to understand the assumptions made in the argument because the answer essentially attacks an assumption. How are you at assumption questions?
KW

Posted from my mobile device
_________________


Kyle Widdison | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | Utah


Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Course Reviews | View Instructor Profile



Intern
Intern
User avatar
Joined: 11 Nov 2014
Posts: 36
Concentration: Marketing, Finance
WE: Programming (Computer Software)
Re: Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Nov 2016, 19:23
1
From egmat -
Let’s suppose the argument says that

Eating sugar leads to obesity.

Can we weaken this statement by saying that

Eating oil leads to obesity.
The answer is No.


Why? Because the author is not saying that only eating sugar leads to obesity. The author is only saying that eating sugar is one of the ways to get obese. Even from common understanding, we all know that both of these things i.e. eating sugar and eating oil lead to obesity. The fact that eating oil makes you obese has no impact on the likelihood of the fact that eating sugar leads to obesity. In other words, saying that there are multiple ways to achieve the same objective does not weaken the conclusion which only states one of the ways to reach the objective.

Now the modified Version -
Eating sugar made Jon obese.

Can we weaken my statement by saying that -


Eating oil made Jon obese.


The answer here is Yes. In this argument, we are essentially talking about a specific case i.e. what made Jon obese. Here, it is given knowledge that Jon is obese, what the argument or the conclusion provides is a reason that made Jon obese.


A great explanation by using the same question as an example -
I found it really helpful.

https://e-gmat.com/blog/gmat-verbal/cri ... e-weakener
Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 03 May 2017
Posts: 100
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Jun 2017, 19:59
1
leia23 wrote:
Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods when the Darfir Republic's currency,
the pundra, was weak: its value was unusually low relative to the world's most stable currencies. Both times a
weak pundra made Darfir's manufactured products a bargain on world markets, and Darfir's exports were up
substantially. Now some politicians are saying that, in order to cause another similarly sized increase in
exports, the government should allow the pundra to become weak again.

Which of the following, if true, provides the government with the strongest grounds to doubt that the politicians'
recommendation, if followed, will achieve its aim?


A. Several of the politicians now recommending that the pundra be allowed to become weak made that same
recommendation before each of the last two periods of currency weakness.
B. After several decades of operating well below peak capacity, Darfir's manufacturing sector is now operating at
near-peak levels.
C. The economy of a country experiencing a rise in exports will become healthier only if the country's currency is
strong or the rise in exports is significant.
D. Those countries whose manufactured products compete with Darfir's on the world market all currently have
stable currencies.
E. A sharp improvement in the efficiency of Darfir's manufacturing plants would make Darfir's products a bargain
on world markets even without any weakening of the pundra relative to other currencies.


Hi,

The key to this question is superlatives, i.e the two currency weakenings have already increased exports substantially and option B said manufacturing is at near peak level, therefore weakening the currency again is likely to have diminishing returns and this definitely weakens the politicians' proposal. Most of the other options are out of scope.

Best
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 11 Jun 2017
Posts: 78
Re: Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Nov 2017, 14:36
1
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
madGMAT wrote:
Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods when Darfir Republic's currency, the pundra, was weak: its value was unusually low relative to the world's most stable currencies. Both times a weak pundra made Darfir's manufactured products a bargain on the world markets, and Darfir's exports were up substantially. Now some politicians are saying that, in order to cause another similarly sized increase in exports, the government should allow the pundra to become weak again.

Which of the following if true provides the government with the strongest grounds to doubt the politican's recommendation, if followed, will achieve its aim?
a) Several of the politicians no recommending that the pundra be allowed to become weak made that same recommendation before each of the last two periods of currency weakness.
b) After several decades of operating well below its peak capcity, darfir's manufacturing sector is now operating at near-peak levels
c) the economy of a country experiencing a rise in exports will become healthier only if the country's currency is strong or the rise in exports is significant.
d) those countries whose manufactured products compete with darfir's on the world market currently all have stable currencies
e) a sharp improvement in the efficiency of darfir's manufacturing plants would make darfir's products a bargain on the world markets even without weakening of the pundra relative to other currencies.

Can someone explain???


It is a 'weaken the plan' question.

What is the plan?
Plan: When currency weakens, exports increase. (Foreigners can buy more using same amount of their currencies so they buy more.) Therefore, in order to cause another similarly sized increase in exports, the government should allow the pundra to become weak again.

Focus on the highlighted words. The aim is to cause a similarly sized increase in exports. That is what the plan is trying to achieve. On weaken questions, we focus on the conclusion. What the plan is trying to achieve is parallel to conclusion. So we focus on trying to weaken what the plan is trying to achieve. We need to find something that tells us why we will not get a similarly sized increase in exports even if we weaken pundra.

Options a, c, d and e do not talk about the reasons we will not see similarly sized increase in exports.
Option B tells us that darfir's manufacturing sector is now operating at near-peak levels. If this is true, exports cannot increase much because darfir cannot manufacture more than it is manufacturing now. If there are no extra products manufactured, there cannot be extra exports. In previous instances, darfir was manufacturing below capacity so they could manufacture extra products. Hence the plan worked in those instances but this time it may not. Therefore, option (B) is correct.



Hi VeritasPrepKarishma,

I understand that the plan as stated in the argument was to weaken the pundra in order to increase exports. B says that even though you weaken the currency, you may still not achieve an increase in exports. However, how do we identify this is exactly what is to be weakened ? How I saw it initially was that the argument is stating that an increase in exports will be achieved by weakening the pundra. So, we find some other alternate thing that could increase the exports (other than the currency weakening), we can probably weaken our conclusion. E provides an alternate reason ?

Can you shed some light on this and explain how do you exactly understand here that is what is to be weakened ?
Study Buddy Forum Moderator
User avatar
D
Joined: 04 Sep 2016
Posts: 1207
Location: India
WE: Engineering (Other)
Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Nov 2017, 16:26
Poorvasha

Quote:
I understand that the plan as stated in the argument was to weaken the pundra in order to increase exports. B says that even though you weaken the currency, you may still not achieve an increase in exports. However, how do we identify this is exactly what is to be weakened ?


Focus on the goal of the plan,which is we need to cause similar sized exports in future as in past.

Quote:
How I saw it initially was that the argument is stating that an increase in exports will be achieved by weakening the pundra. So, we find some other alternate thing that could increase the exports (other than the currency weakening), we can probably weaken our conclusion. E provides an alternate reason ?


I think subtle difference you missed is that goal of the plan is about future, as indicated by SHOULD.
Whenever a cause and effect relationship takes place in past, alternate cause is correct weakener.
We know here that there was an unique cause that led to effect.

But when a causal effect is shown in present tense / future, will alternate cause be the correct weakener. Think about it.

No, since we do not know if the said cause was the only one that lead to the effect, Right?

You might help below explanation helpful too:

X will lead to Y (X: Weak pundra, Y: similarly sized increase in exports) So, this argument is talking about a future case that X will lead to Y. Remember, in this argument, Y has not occurred in the past and the argument is not trying to explain the reasons for
its occurrence. The argument is making a futuristic statement that X will lead to Y.
The option statement for this argument says that:
A sharp improvement in the efficiency of Darfir's manufacturing plants would make Darfir's product a bargain on world markets even without any weakening of the pundra relative to other currencies
The statement presents an alternate route, Z, to reach the same end Y ( Z: A sharp improvement in the efficiency of Darfir's manufacturing plants, Y: similar sized increase in exports). Here again, just
the presence of one more way to reach the end does not weaken the argument that X will lead to Y.
The argument does not say that only X will lead to Y. If there are other ways to reach Y, it does not
impact the argument.

Hope this helps!
_________________

It's the journey that brings us happiness not the destination.

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 03 Dec 2017
Posts: 7
CAT Tests
Re: Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Sep 2018, 04:41
Dear Experts, I am trying hard to understand the logic, but..
Since last time a week currency increased exports, hence politicians assume that to increase exports the currency needs to be devalued gain.
Option B: States that the manufacturing sector is already working at its peak level, hence they cannot cope up with further increase in exports. Here we have to assume that all the products being manufactured is being utilised/sold in the market, yet the exports are currently low, that is the products are not being sold in international market. Thus even if there is any further demand in products, the manufacturing sector wont be able to keep up with the demand, thus politicians plan will not work.
Option D: there is no point in comparing with other countries, although they are the competitors are currency have stable currencies and may be low exports?
Please verify my understanding.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods &nbs [#permalink] 14 Sep 2018, 04:41
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


Copyright

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®.