Hi Friends,
I am having difficulty in answering the following question. Need help.
The recently negotiated North American Free Trade Agreement among Canada, Mexico, and the United
States is misnamed, because it would not result in truly free trade. Adam Smith, the economist who first articulated the principles of free trade, held that any obstacle placed in the way of the free movement of goods, investment, or labor would defeat free trade. So since under the agreement workers would be restricted by national boundaries from seeking the best conditions they could find, the resulting obstruction of the flow of trade would, from a free-trade perspective, be harmful.
The argument proceeds by
(A) ruling out alternatives
(B) using a term in two different senses
(C) citing a non-representative instance
(D) appealing to a relevant authority
(E) responding to a different issue from the one posed
OA after some discussions.
North American Free Trade
This topic has expert replies
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 239
- Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 8:40 am
- Location: India
- Thanked: 5 times
- Followed by:2 members
- GMAT Score:690
- VivianKerr
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 1035
- Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 11:13 am
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Thanked: 474 times
- Followed by:365 members
Let's examine the layout of the argument.
1st Conclusion: NAFTA is misnamed b/c it would not result in "free" trade.
Evidence: Adam Smith's definition: Free trade defeated by obstacles to movement. Agreement restricts movement outside of countries.
2nd Conclusion: Obstruction would be harmful.
Question Rephrase: HOW does the author make his case?
Prediction: He uses Adam Smith's definition, then applies it to NAFTA.
A - no alternatives are mentioned
B - what term? "free trade" is elaborated on, but only in 1 sense (Adam Smith's definition)
C - the only thing that could be considered an "instance" is the agreement workers, but it would be representative, not "non-representative". Regardless, this is unclear.
D - Adam Smith would be the "authority" since he is "the economist who first articulated the principles"
E - The "issue" never changes. It's always NAFTA and free trade.
IMO: D
1st Conclusion: NAFTA is misnamed b/c it would not result in "free" trade.
Evidence: Adam Smith's definition: Free trade defeated by obstacles to movement. Agreement restricts movement outside of countries.
2nd Conclusion: Obstruction would be harmful.
Question Rephrase: HOW does the author make his case?
Prediction: He uses Adam Smith's definition, then applies it to NAFTA.
A - no alternatives are mentioned
B - what term? "free trade" is elaborated on, but only in 1 sense (Adam Smith's definition)
C - the only thing that could be considered an "instance" is the agreement workers, but it would be representative, not "non-representative". Regardless, this is unclear.
D - Adam Smith would be the "authority" since he is "the economist who first articulated the principles"
E - The "issue" never changes. It's always NAFTA and free trade.
IMO: D
Vivian Kerr
GMAT Rockstar, Tutor
https://www.GMATrockstar.com
https://www.yelp.com/biz/gmat-rockstar-los-angeles
Former Kaplan and Grockit instructor, freelance GMAT content creator, now offering affordable, effective, Skype-tutoring for the GMAT at $150/hr. Contact: [email protected]
Thank you for all the "thanks" and "follows"!
GMAT Rockstar, Tutor
https://www.GMATrockstar.com
https://www.yelp.com/biz/gmat-rockstar-los-angeles
Former Kaplan and Grockit instructor, freelance GMAT content creator, now offering affordable, effective, Skype-tutoring for the GMAT at $150/hr. Contact: [email protected]
Thank you for all the "thanks" and "follows"!
- Ozlemg
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 407
- Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 9:19 am
- Thanked: 25 times
- Followed by:7 members
It is tricky in deed!
At first sight, it seems the writer agree with Adam Smith. But though the end of the question stem, the writer actually denies what Smith believes. So, the correct answer is appealing to a relevant authority
It is D
At first sight, it seems the writer agree with Adam Smith. But though the end of the question stem, the writer actually denies what Smith believes. So, the correct answer is appealing to a relevant authority
It is D
The more you suffer before the test, the less you will do so in the test!