• Economist Test Prep
    Free Trial & Practice Exam
    BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Economist Test Prep
  • PrepScholar GMAT
    5 Day FREE Trial
    Study Smarter, Not Harder

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    PrepScholar GMAT
  • Magoosh
    Magoosh
    Study with Magoosh GMAT prep

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Magoosh
  • e-gmat Exclusive Offer
    Get 300+ Practice Questions
    25 Video lessons and 6 Webinars for FREE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    e-gmat Exclusive Offer
  • Kaplan Test Prep
    Free Practice Test & Review
    How would you score if you took the GMAT

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Kaplan Test Prep
  • Varsity Tutors
    Award-winning private GMAT tutoring
    Register now and save up to $200

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Varsity Tutors
  • EMPOWERgmat Slider
    1 Hour Free
    BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    EMPOWERgmat Slider
  • Target Test Prep
    5-Day Free Trial
    5-day free, full-access trial TTP Quant

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Target Test Prep
  • Veritas Prep
    Free Veritas GMAT Class
    Experience Lesson 1 Live Free

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Veritas Prep

PLS HELP ME EXPLAIN THIS!

This topic has 4 member replies

PLS HELP ME EXPLAIN THIS!

Post Tue Aug 14, 2007 10:54 pm
Hi everybody,there is a passage from OG 10th with just 1 question = explanation that I don't fully understand. My mother tongue is not English,could anyone help me explain this question? Thanks a lot!

Here is the passage:
During the 1960's and 1970's, the primary economic development strategy of local governments in the United States
was to attract manufacturing industries. Unfortunately, this strategy was usually implemented at another community's expense: many manufacturing facilities were lured away from their moorings elsewhere through tax incentives and slick promotional efforts. Through the transfer of jobs and related revenues that resulted from this practice, one town's triumph could become another town's tragedy.
In the 1980's the strategy shifted from this zero-sum game to one called "high-technology development," in which local governments competed to attract newly formed high-technology manufacturing firms. Although this approach was preferable to victimizing other geographical areas by taking their jobs, it also had its shortcomings: high-tech manufacturing firms employ only a specially trained fraction of the manufacturing workforce, and there simply are
not enough high-tech firms to satisfy all geographic areas.
Recently, local governments have increasingly come to recognize the advantages of yet a third strategy: the
promotion of homegrown small businesses. Small indigenous businesses are created by a nearly ubiquitous resource,
local entrepreneurs. With roots in their communities, these individuals are less likely to be enticed away by
incentives offered by another community. Indigenous industry and talent are kept at home, creating an environment
that both provides jobs and fosters further entrepreneurship.


Here is the question:
145. The passage suggests which of the following about the majority of United States manufacturing industries
before the high-technology development era of the 1980's?
(A) They lost many of their most innovative personnel to small entrepreneurial enterprises.
(B) They experienced a major decline in profits during the 1960's and 1970's.
(C) They could provide real economic benefits to the areas in which they were located.
(D) They employed workers who had no specialized skills.
(E) They actively interfered with local entrepreneurial ventures.

Here is the answer of OG
145.
The best answer is C. The final sentence of the first paragraph suggests that, during the 1960's and
1970's, a town that attracted a manufacturer thereby achieved a "triumph" (line 9), whereas a town
losing one of these industries suffered a "tragedy" (line 10). It is thus suggested that the majority of these industries prior to the 1980's could provide real economic benefits to the areas in which
they were located. Choice D can be eliminated, because although the last sentence of the second paragraph suggests that manufacturing industries prior to the 1980's did not limit their employment to a specially trained fraction of manufacturing workers, it does not suggest that the
majority of these industries employed workers who had no specialized skills. Nothing in the passage suggests any of the statements made in A, B, and E


Here is my Explantion
I don't agree with the explanation from OG because, according to the passage, the strategy for 60s-70s period is "the zero-sum game" and " one town's triumph could become another town's tragedy." So , how can we say that the MAJORITY of United States manufacturing industries could provide real economic benefits to the areas in which they were located.?

I'm looking forward to your reply, thanks a lot!

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Need free GMAT or MBA advice from an expert? Register for Beat The GMAT now and post your question in these forums!
archileo73 Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts Default Avatar
Joined
17 Apr 2007
Posted:
3 messages
Top Reply
Post Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:08 am
The MAJORITY of United States manufacturing industries could provide real economic benefits to the areas in which they were located but not the areas they are not located. The strategy of attracting manufacturing industries was nationally zero sum but locally beneficial!

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
jangojess Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts Default Avatar
Joined
02 Jul 2007
Posted:
175 messages
Followed by:
1 members
Upvotes:
15
Top Reply
Post Fri Sep 14, 2007 6:06 am
the term zero-sum is correct...its actually the sum of advantages/profits/loss of all the towns...so if one town triumphed/profited A$ then it has resulted in a tragedy/loss of another town by A$...resulting in total sum as ZERO for both towns....

Now by this process one town is getting benefited too....which is meant in C

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Thanked by: nirupshetty
archileo73 Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts Default Avatar
Joined
17 Apr 2007
Posted:
3 messages
Post Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:08 am
The MAJORITY of United States manufacturing industries could provide real economic benefits to the areas in which they were located but not the areas they are not located. The strategy of attracting manufacturing industries was nationally zero sum but locally beneficial!

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
jangojess Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts Default Avatar
Joined
02 Jul 2007
Posted:
175 messages
Followed by:
1 members
Upvotes:
15
Post Fri Sep 14, 2007 6:06 am
the term zero-sum is correct...its actually the sum of advantages/profits/loss of all the towns...so if one town triumphed/profited A$ then it has resulted in a tragedy/loss of another town by A$...resulting in total sum as ZERO for both towns....

Now by this process one town is getting benefited too....which is meant in C

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Thanked by: nirupshetty

Best Conversation Starters

1 lheiannie07 120 topics
2 ardz24 65 topics
3 LUANDATO 63 topics
4 swerve 61 topics
5 AAPL 59 topics
See More Top Beat The GMAT Members...

Most Active Experts

1 image description Scott@TargetTestPrep

Target Test Prep

186 posts
2 image description Brent@GMATPrepNow

GMAT Prep Now Teacher

171 posts
3 image description Jeff@TargetTestPrep

Target Test Prep

147 posts
4 image description Rich.C@EMPOWERgma...

EMPOWERgmat

133 posts
5 image description GMATGuruNY

The Princeton Review Teacher

128 posts
See More Top Beat The GMAT Experts