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

Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods when Country X'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 Country X's manufactured products a bargain on world markets, and Country X's exports were up substantially. Now some politicians are saying that in order to cause another large 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.
Incorrect. Maybe they are right again? Anyway, the past does not guarantee the future

(B) After several decades of operating well below peak capacity, Country X's manufacturing sector is now operating at peak levels.
Correct. If pundra is weakend, but the industrial infrastructure is not able to face the increasing demand, then the export will not increase

(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.
Incorrect. Only=red flag

(D) Those countries whose manufactured products compete with Country X's on the world market all currently have stable currencies.
Incorrect. This strengthen the argument, exported products are the sme but cost less

(E) Any improvement in the efficiency of Country X's manufacturing plants would make Country X's products more competitive on world markets even without any weakening of the pundra relative to other currencies.
Incorrect. Out of scope, we are asked to evaluate a plan, not to provide a different one

Plan: To cause another large increase in exports, the government should allow the pundra to become weak again.
Goal: To increase export significantly.
Premise: Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods when Country X'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 Country X's manufactured products a bargain on world markets, and Country X's exports were up substantially.
Assumption: Earlier method would still work this time.
Prethinking: Any option which provides evidence to weaken the above assumption will be the answer.
Why correct? B) Export operating at peak levels will leave no capacity to accommodate any additional export demands which tells us even if we lower the currency, no matter what the export will not increase.
Why wrong? A) Politicians making the same demand during this time, even if they are experts does not support in any substantive way whether export will increase as a result.
C) We don't know whether currency will become strong or rise in export could be significant. Significant Rise in export even when the currency is weak might support the plan's success.
D) Out of scope. Other currencies having stable currency doesn't definitively answers what will be the economy state of Pundra.
E) This regards the whole method but doesnt answer whether this method will increase export.

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?

The key to get this question correct is noticing the fact that the question stem is asking to doubt that the aim will not be achieved.

Aim was : Rise in exports
Potential reason to doubt : Maybe manufactures cant produce more so cannot lead to more exports in any way, which is what only Option B says

Happy learning