Kernland -GMATPREP. Experts pls help

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 217
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 1:39 pm
Thanked: 7 times
Followed by:1 members

Kernland -GMATPREP. Experts pls help

by zaarathelab » Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:08 am
Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed cashew nuts in order to ensure that the nuts are sold to domestic processing plants. If the tariff were lifted and unprocessed cashews were sold at world market prices, more farmers could profit by growing cashews. However, since all the processing plants are in urban areas, removing the tariff would seriously hamper the government's effort to reduce urban unemployment over the next five years.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Some of the byproducts of processing cashews are used for manufacturing paints and plastics.
B. Other countries in which cashews are processed subsidize their processing plants.
C. More people in Kernland are engaged in farming cashews than in processing them.
D. Buying unprocessed cashews at lower than world market prices enables cashew processors in
Kernland to sell processed nuts at competitive prices
E. A lack of profitable crops is driving an increasing number of small farmers in Kernland off their
land and into the cities.

Pls support your choice with explanations
Success = Max(Hardwork) + Min(Luck)
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 8:49 am
Location: Delhi
Thanked: 6 times

by ranjeet75 » Thu Nov 24, 2011 7:14 am
IMO E

The argument says about the urban employment and the govt wants to reduce urban employment by imposing high tariff on export of cashew nuts but the high tariff on exports is disadvantageous for farmers and they are moving to cities and therefore the urban employment will be adversely affected hence E is correct answer

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1101
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 7:26 am
Thanked: 47 times
Followed by:13 members
GMAT Score:640

by HSPA » Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:50 am
Oh my god.. what a toughie.. I would have chosen 'C' in exam. Only a careful eye can bring out E.

A double negitive it is.. present employment problem gets fixed with the uplift of the high tarrif.

(Farmers)People who are facing loss in agriculture will stop coming to town. Thus less unemployment rate
First take: 640 (50M, 27V) - RC needs 300% improvement
Second take: coming soon..
Regards,
HSPA.

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 279
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 5:43 pm
Thanked: 15 times
Followed by:1 members

by mehrasa » Fri Nov 25, 2011 5:25 am
zaarathelab wrote:Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed cashew nuts in order to ensure that the nuts are sold to domestic processing plants. If the tariff were lifted and unprocessed cashews were sold at world market prices, more farmers could profit by growing cashews. However, since all the processing plants are in urban areas, removing the tariff would seriously hamper the government's effort to reduce urban unemployment over the next five years.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Some of the byproducts of processing cashews are used for manufacturing paints and plastics.
B. Other countries in which cashews are processed subsidize their processing plants.
C. More people in Kernland are engaged in farming cashews than in processing them.
D. Buying unprocessed cashews at lower than world market prices enables cashew processors in
Kernland to sell processed nuts at competitive prices
E. A lack of profitable crops is driving an increasing number of small farmers in Kernland off their
land and into the cities.

Pls support your choice with explanations


wooooooooow, I also made a mistake and chose C.. bcuz I spot the conclusion wrongly
actually the conclusion is that 'Kernland gov. imposes high tariff on unprocessed kernel in order to protect domestic plants and improve urban employment while, according to the stem, the profit of farmers will decrease by this new policy....
for weakening we need to show gov. can not really reach its goal since (as choice E says) the farmers have to move into cities and population of unemployed ppl increase...

Legendary Member
Posts: 627
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:12 am
Thanked: 4 times
Followed by:1 members

by mankey » Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:35 am
IMO: E. What is the OA?

Thanks.

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 5:10 am
Location: Vietnam
Thanked: 10 times
Followed by:5 members

by tuanquang269 » Fri Dec 16, 2011 2:14 am

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 15539
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: New York, NY
Thanked: 13060 times
Followed by:1906 members
GMAT Score:790

by GMATGuruNY » Fri Dec 16, 2011 12:08 pm
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3