Critical Reasoning

Hi All,

I am finding difficulty in nailing this CR question from 300+ CR Questions

Please help.

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 politician'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 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 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.

OA after some discussion

IMO E
a)irrelevant
b)argument concerned about exports and not the manufacturing sector
c) concerns about similar size increase in exports and not the economy.
d) out of scope
e) if efficiency increases, exports will increase and thus no need to weaken the currency.

who cares abt the efficiency...

The Argument is talking abt the Dariff's Product.

IMO B..

If they are working on the Pick level.. that means they are more strong then the time when the currency was weak....

so that is a strongest ground where goverment can doubt..

I will go with B.

Conclusion :the government should allow the pundra to become weak again in order to cause another similarly sized increase in exports,

E doesn't weaken the argument conclusion as it just states another reason to increase the exports.

Whereas answer choice B says that in past the goods were manufactured well below the peak capacity this means that there was a scope to increase the capacity so that it will not be hinder the export.
and now the goods are manufactures just below the peak capacity ---- The industry has reached the max manufacturing capacity beyond which the manufacturing goods won't be possible.

I will go with C

Conclusion: in order to cause another similarly sized increase in exports,the government should allow the pundra to become weak again

We are looking for a choice that weakens and says, "sorry guys but if government allows the pundra to become weak again, we will have a big trouble on the contrary to previous year"

I think this is what C suggets. The stronger the currency, the healtier the economy of a country so the weaker the currency, the poorer the economy. So recommendations of politican fail...