Last visit was: 21 Jul 2024, 10:20 It is currently 21 Jul 2024, 10:20
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
SORT BY:
Date
Tags:
Difficulty: 505-555 Level,   Complete the Passage,                  
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Current Student
Joined: 14 Nov 2016
Posts: 1171
Own Kudos [?]: 20977 [76]
Given Kudos: 926
Location: Malaysia
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GMAT 1: 750 Q51 V40 (Online)
GPA: 3.53
Send PM
Most Helpful Reply
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 6990
Own Kudos [?]: 64549 [13]
Given Kudos: 1823
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Send PM
General Discussion
Manager
Manager
Joined: 17 Jan 2017
Posts: 217
Own Kudos [?]: 266 [1]
Given Kudos: 144
Location: India
GPA: 4
WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)
Send PM
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Jul 2017
Posts: 456
Own Kudos [?]: 731 [4]
Given Kudos: 294
Location: India
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V36
GPA: 4
Send PM
United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods [#permalink]
2
Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Argument : -
1. Increase in shipments from USA to Mexico due to reduced tariffs
2. but increase in shipments doesn't mean increase in sales of USA-produced-goods in mexico

What do we need to find out?
We need to find out a reason that gives a reason to support #2 in the argument

(A) many of the United States companies that produced goods that year had competitors based in Mexico that had long produced the same kind of goods ---> It can cause an increase in sales if the price of the USA-produced-goods is cheaper than that of mexico-produced goods or vice versa. we don't have info regarding prices. Incomplete info. OUT

(B) most of the increase in goods shipped by United States companies to Mexico was in parts shipped to the companies’ newly relocated subsidiaries for assembly and subsequent shipment back to the United States ---> This option provides a strong reason to say that companies shipped more goods to their own subsidiaries only to be shipped back to the USA. Hence, the goods are not meant for sales in Mexico and therefore will not cause in sales in MEXICO. CORRECT

(C) marketing goods to a previously unavailable group of consumers is most successful when advertising specifically targets those consumers, but developing such advertising often takes longer than a year ---> clearly IRRELEVANT. OUT

(D) the amount of Mexican goods shipped to the United States remained the same as it had been before the tariff reductions ---> We are concerned about the reverse. Also, this option doesn't provide any reason to say why sales will not increase in Mexico. OUT

(E) there was no significant change in the employment rate in either of the countries that year ---> this option doesn't provide any reason to say why sales will not increase in Mexico. IRRELEVANT. OUT
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 11 Feb 2018
Posts: 297
Own Kudos [?]: 196 [0]
Given Kudos: 115
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Finance
GMAT 1: 690 Q47 V37
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V36
GMAT 3: 750 Q50 V42
Send PM
Re: United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods [#permalink]
I think this is a clear C.B is wrong because the argument says DOUBLE the number of goods were SOLD in Mexico.B does not account for this fact.B says the goods are coming back to the US.

The tariffs did not cause the sales to increase in Mexico because __________? is basically the question

Ans : The tariffs did not cause the sales to increase in Mexico because = people did not know about tariff reduction...

which is what C says.

Disclaimer : If I am wrong please don't screw me up....its an honest mistake.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 11 Feb 2018
Posts: 297
Own Kudos [?]: 196 [0]
Given Kudos: 115
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Finance
GMAT 1: 690 Q47 V37
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V36
GMAT 3: 750 Q50 V42
Send PM
United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods [#permalink]
I can also see why people have gone for B(this could very well be the right answer here on second thought). chetan2u is this question ambiguous.Have sales in Mexico gone up or not.?Can you please help
RC & DI Moderator
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Status:Math and DI Expert
Posts: 11479
Own Kudos [?]: 34497 [1]
Given Kudos: 323
Send PM
Re: United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
Hi redskull1, Ans should be B..
Reason for each choice as given below

Flow of argument..
Amount of goods shipped to Mexico doubled in the year after tariffs were lowered.
However does not mean that it resulted in double the sales of good..

Catch here is CHANGE in Shipping of goods TO sales of goods..


Which of the following, if true, most logically completes the politician's argument?

United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods shipped to Mexico doubled in the year after tariffs on trade between the two countries were reduced, it does not follow that the reduction in tariffs caused the sales of United States goods to companies and consumers in Mexico to double that year, because __________.

(A) many of the United States companies that produced goods that year had competitors based in Mexico that had long produced the same kind of goods
Not relevant

(B) most of the increase in goods shipped by United States companies to Mexico was in parts shipped to the companies’ newly relocated subsidiaries for assembly and subsequent shipment back to the United States

This gives us the quantum of stores shipped but not resulting in sales..
Correct

(C) marketing goods to a previously unavailable group of consumers is most successful when advertising specifically targets those consumers, but developing such advertising often takes longer than a year
Too many uncertainties..
Unavailable group?? People would buy because the rates have gone down and not necessarily wait for advertising

(D) the amount of Mexican goods shipped to the United States remained the same as it had been before the tariff reductions
Irrelevant

(E) there was no significant change in the employment rate in either of the countries that year
Out of context

B
Intern
Intern
Joined: 22 Jul 2018
Posts: 13
Own Kudos [?]: 16 [0]
Given Kudos: 5
Location: Turkey
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V37
GPA: 2.9
Send PM
Re: United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods [#permalink]
How D is irrelevant here?

It says tariffs between the two countries reduced, but Mexico shippings to US didn't change. Doesn't this indicate that change in shippings was independent of tariff reductions?

What am I missing here?

Also, for answer B; it doesn't change the fact that you are exporting even if you send the items to a subsidiary, and reducing tariffs would clearly help exporting to another country.
Manager
Manager
Joined: 22 Jul 2019
Posts: 71
Own Kudos [?]: 10 [0]
Given Kudos: 38
Send PM
Re: United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods [#permalink]
why answer B?

tariffs reduced, amt of good not double?

the last time i checked, shipping from one country to other (regardless whatever reasons) constituted as sales!
Manager
Manager
Joined: 31 Jan 2020
Posts: 230
Own Kudos [?]: 15 [0]
Given Kudos: 139
Send PM
Re: United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods [#permalink]
What I understand is that "the reduction in tariffs didn't cause the sales of US goods to companies and consumers in Mexico". So, It cam be because of other reasons or other, such as Marketing/Advertising. Why is (C) wrong?
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 03 Oct 2013
Affiliations: CrackVerbal
Posts: 4918
Own Kudos [?]: 7807 [0]
Given Kudos: 221
Location: India
Send PM
Re: United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods [#permalink]
Top Contributor
Tanchat wrote:
What I understand is that "the reduction in tariffs didn't cause the sales of US goods to companies and consumers in Mexico". So, It cam be because of other reasons or other, such as Marketing/Advertising. Why is (C) wrong?


Hi

As per option (C), such advertising "is most successful when advertising specifically targets those consumers, but developing such advertising often takes longer than a year". But the politician is talking about doubling of sales to Mexico in "the year after tariffs on trade between the two countries were reduced". In this period, it is likely that such advertising would not have been developed (since it takes >1 year) and hence the increase could not have been due to advertising.

Hope this helps.
VP
VP
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Posts: 1352
Own Kudos [?]: 221 [0]
Given Kudos: 188
Send PM
Re: United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods [#permalink]
OA solution
Attachments

Solution.JPG
Solution.JPG [ 134.18 KiB | Viewed 14794 times ]

VP
VP
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Posts: 1352
Own Kudos [?]: 221 [0]
Given Kudos: 188
Send PM
United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods [#permalink]
I think the arguement can be made much simpler by saying :

Just because sales of American good increased to mexico -- that does not mean -- sales of those American goods were purchased by Mexican companies and Mexican consumers specifically

Explain why

-----------

B) This explains why : sales of American good did increase to Mexico. But the sales were not to Mexican companies and Meixcan consumers. The sales were instead to American companies in Mexico.

C) This is saying -- actually - sales DID increase to Mexican consumers and Mexican companies. This is opposite to what we want. We want to explain why sales DID NOT GO to Mexican consumers and Mexican companies.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 20 Dec 2020
Posts: 286
Own Kudos [?]: 30 [0]
Given Kudos: 497
Location: India
Send PM
Re: United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods [#permalink]
KarishmaB GMATNinja
Why A is incorrect?

(A) many of the United States companies that produced goods that year had competitors based in Mexico that had long produced the same kind of goods
If many US companies had competitors in Mexico, then consumer might prefer Mexican goods instead of US goods and they will buy goods from Mexican companies . This statement does explain why sales of US goods didn't double that year.
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 15126
Own Kudos [?]: 66764 [1]
Given Kudos: 436
Location: Pune, India
Send PM
Re: United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
Sneha2021 wrote:
KarishmaB GMATNinja
Why A is incorrect?

(A) many of the United States companies that produced goods that year had competitors based in Mexico that had long produced the same kind of goods
If many US companies had competitors in Mexico, then consumer might prefer Mexican goods instead of US goods and they will buy goods from Mexican companies . This statement does explain why sales of US goods didn't double that year.


The argument says that more goods were SHIPPED to Mexico but that doesn't mean that more goods were BOUGHT by Mexican people and companies.
Why?

How can you explain an increase in shipping but not sale?

(A) many of the United States companies that produced goods that year had competitors based in Mexico that had long produced the same kind of goods
Why would the shipping increase then? Why would US companies ship more goods to Mexico if people were not buying from them - it doesn't explain.

(B) most of the increase in goods shipped by United States companies to Mexico was in parts shipped to the companies’ newly relocated subsidiaries for assembly and subsequent shipment back to the United States
This tells us that US companies shipped more products to Mexico because they were shipping them to their own subsidiaries for assembly and these goods were eventually shipped back to US.
This explain increase in shipping even though Mexicans were not buying more US products.

That is why (A) is incorrect and (B) is correct.
VP
VP
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Posts: 1352
Own Kudos [?]: 221 [0]
Given Kudos: 188
Send PM
United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods [#permalink]
AnishPassi IanStewart AjiteshArun avigutman

What exactly is the argument ?

Is the argument
Quote:
(#1) Tariffs are NOT the reason why US exports have doubled to Mexicans companies and Mexican consumers

OR

(#2) US Exports have NOT doubled to Mexican companies and Mexican consumers


I personally thought the argument was (#1) and not (#2)

(C) then becomes the answer.

because (C) gives us an alternative reason (not Tariffs but Advertising) was the reason why US exports have doubled to Mexicans companies and Mexican consumers

Originally posted by jabhatta2 on 17 Jan 2023, 08:07.
Last edited by jabhatta2 on 17 Jan 2023, 08:56, edited 1 time in total.
Tutor
Joined: 17 Jul 2019
Posts: 1304
Own Kudos [?]: 1746 [0]
Given Kudos: 66
Location: Canada
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V45
GMAT 2: 780 Q50 V47
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Send PM
Re: United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods [#permalink]
Expert Reply
jabhatta2 wrote:
AnishPassi IanStewart AjiteshArun avigutman

What exactly is the argument ?

Is the argument
Quote:
(#1) Tariffs are NOT the reason why US exports have doubled to Mexicans companies and Mexican consumers

OR

(#2) US Exports have NOT doubled to Mexican companies and Mexican consumers


If option 1) -- i think (C) is the answer

If option 2) - then (B) is the answer.

jabhatta2 I think the problem is that you're playing fast and loose with the word "exports".
The premise says that the amount of goods shipped doubled following the reduction of tariffs. Goods shipped is not the same as exports.
The claim is about whether the reduction in tariffs caused the sales of goods to double. "sales of goods" is not the same as "amount of goods shipped."
VP
VP
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Posts: 1352
Own Kudos [?]: 221 [0]
Given Kudos: 188
Send PM
United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods [#permalink]
Hi avigutman – thank you so much for your response.

avigutman wrote:
Goods shipped is not the same as exports.


I agree.

I will AVOID USING the word exports completely as I think the word Exports is not accurate in this situation.

avigutman wrote:
"sales of goods" is not the same as "amount of goods shipped."


This statement confused me unfortunately :)

Is the author really differentiating between the green and the yellow ?

Is the green - revenues whereas the yellow - number of good sold ?
Attachments

screenshot 2.jpg
screenshot 2.jpg [ 62.39 KiB | Viewed 6728 times ]

Tutor
Joined: 17 Jul 2019
Posts: 1304
Own Kudos [?]: 1746 [0]
Given Kudos: 66
Location: Canada
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V45
GMAT 2: 780 Q50 V47
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Send PM
Re: United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods [#permalink]
Expert Reply
jabhatta2 wrote:
Hi avigutman – thank you so much for your response.

avigutman wrote:
Goods shipped is not the same as exports.


I agree.

I will AVOID USING the word exports completely as I think the word Exports is not accurate in this situation.

avigutman wrote:
"sales of goods" is not the same as "amount of goods shipped."


This statement confused me unfortunately :)

Is the author really differentiating between the green and the yellow ?

Is the green - revenues whereas the yellow - number of good sold ?

No, green is not revenues, jabhatta2. Just because something is shipped doesn't mean its sold or generates revenues. When I moved from NYC to Toronto I had all my stuff shipped, for example.
VP
VP
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Posts: 1352
Own Kudos [?]: 221 [0]
Given Kudos: 188
Send PM
United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods [#permalink]
Hi avigutman - thank you so much for your prompt response.

avigutman wrote:
jabhatta2 wrote:
Is the green - revenues whereas the yellow - number of good sold ?

No, green is not revenues, jabhatta2. Just because something is shipped doesn't mean its sold or generates revenues. When I moved from NYC to Toronto I had all my stuff shipped, for example.


Hmm clearly my understanding of the argument was flawed.

If I understand, what you saying is, the argument is the following:

Quote:
Just because goods shipped has increased – that doesn’t necessarily mean -- sales of goods to Mexican companies / sales of goods to Mexican consumers has increased


goods shipped ARE NOT THE SAME AS goods sold

In that case -- yes – (B) is the OA

But I didn’t think that was the argument.

Reason – the red.

How were you so sure, to not pay attention to the red ?

A sentence like the red IS KEY information and it seems like the red is being completely ignored as part of the 'essential meaning' of the argument.
Attachments

screenshot 3.jpg
screenshot 3.jpg [ 96.09 KiB | Viewed 6713 times ]

GMAT Club Bot
United States politician: Although the amount of United States goods [#permalink]
 1   2   
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6990 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
236 posts
CR Forum Moderator
824 posts