ya ya Fibo,
Fully agreed.. There is hell lot of issues with the question itself.....
It shall be reallly futile at this midnite to oil our brains for this dumb question..(sorry Nikil)
I agree with Fibo, even C or D wont make any sense....
See Now, i/we wasted hell lot of time... Tha includes everyone...a chain of users...
Both C & D wont fit here.....everyone can argue against each other...!!
So lets crap this one out as of now!!
steel manufacturers
-
gmatmachoman
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 2326
- Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
- Thanked: 173 times
- Followed by:2 members
- GMAT Score:710
-
kaulnikhil
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 338
- Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 1:49 am
- Thanked: 9 times
- Followed by:3 members
GMATreply2spg wrote:what is the source of this question?
Last edited by kaulnikhil on Mon Mar 08, 2010 1:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- reply2spg
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1261
- Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:46 am
- Thanked: 27 times
- GMAT Score:570
Thanks Nikil. I think this is not a good question. I see that C is not helpful to answer the question, I am still with D....I am with Fibbo. Hope Testluv can also chip in.
kaulnikhil wrote:GMAT SETSreply2spg wrote:what is the source of this question?
-
Phirozz
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 232
- Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 10:47 pm
- Thanked: 10 times
D is saying govt subsidies are not the only factor contributing to low cost of foreign steel products, it means there are other factors, say low labour cost or raw material cost etc, which contribute to low cost. But it can never be quality because if quality rises cost will also go up. And whatever the factor contributing to low cost at foreign countries does not matter, govt is concerned about rising imported steel prices in Turinan which can be done by import tariff hike. D also ignores another part is protecting employment in other industrial sector.fibbonnaci wrote:conclusion: to protect the steel industry in Turinan, the government of Turinan should levy heavy tariffs against foreign steel imports.
Premise: Many of these foreign imports are less expensive because the governments of the countries subsidize their steel industries.
Lets look at our options now :
A. Steel produced in Turinan is rarely competitive on the world market, partially as a result of the fact that the steel industry in Turinan is not subsidized by the government. [This strengthens the argument. It says that tariffs imposed will deliver the desired effect. Eliminated]
B. No clear penalties for violating the international ban on government subsidization of steel manufacture have been specified to date. [if the penalties exist so what? how is the conclusion affected? Eliminated!]
C. Many non-steel manufacturers in Turinan must contend with heavy competition, both at home and on the world market, and steel represents a large proportion of their materials costs. [This is a strengthner again!It tells that steel represents a large proportion of material costs so an increase in the tariffs will force them to look at local manufacturers. Eliminated!]
D. Government subsidies are not the only factor contributing to the availability of lower-cost foreign steel products that are currently threatening the steel industry of Turinan. [ My answer. It correctly points out that cost is not the only reason.say the quality is extremely good. therefore evn if Turania imposes tariffs on imports, it may not affect the consumption coz of some other attraction in the product!]
E. Steelworkers in Turinan, on average, earn higher wages than do steelworkers in many of the countries from which the referenced foreign steel imports originate.[ steel workers earning higher wages does not imply anything. Eliminated!]
Hope this helps!
D is completely out of scope due to above two reasons and answer is C.
-
Phirozz
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 232
- Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 10:47 pm
- Thanked: 10 times
Hope u are not clear what question is saying..fibbonnaci wrote:See higher costs means lower profits to the company and hence they turn to the local industries.
Now local industries jobs are safe. and hence the program is protecting the local guys.
There is no reason to assume that the companies are gonna stick with the import steel even though their prices are going to rise.
The program is initiated to protect the local industries, and i dont see a reason why this companies need to stick to higher import rates and pull themselves into loss?
Honestly, i would need one more statement to tell that companies will not shift their preferences no matter what coz of some other special feature of the imported steel.
If Chennai can produce the same steel as in Delhi, why would an industry in Chennai insist on getting the steel from Delhi inspite of the Delhi steel being greater in price???
I still dont buy C. There are so many inherent assumptions in it.
Govt wants to do two things
1. to protect local steel industries
2. At the same time to protect employment in other industrial sectors
And govt is planning to oachieve above two goals by hiking import duties, and we are looking for an option which will weeken any of the above two or both or prove that above two cannot be achieved at the same time.
Now come to option C. It is not saying anything about steel industries, its talking only about other industrial sectors. Other industries will remain competitive and will not lose emplyment if their cost is less and steel is the major cost for them. But if govt plan is implemented, their cost will rise(because they are using imported steel now and its price will rise), as a result their their proft will decline and employment will be lost which weekens the 2nd part.
hope it clears !!
And D is completelyout of scope. Its talking about what contributes to low cost which is completely irrelevant. If govt rises tariff, imported steel prices will rise in Turinan whatever factor contributed to low steel prices in foreign countries will not come to picture. It is neither strengthening not weekening.
-
Testluv
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 1302
- Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:13 pm
- Location: Toronto
- Thanked: 539 times
- Followed by:164 members
- GMAT Score:800
recieved a pm (fibo, sorry for getting to it so late--I completely overlooked this one!)
The question is fine, and choice C is indeed correct. (good job gmatmachoman!)
Pay attention to the scope of the conclusion:
Choice C tells us that steel is a large proportion of non-steel manufactuters' material costs.
So, if we levy heavy tariffs on foreign steel, then the cost of purchasing foreign steel will increase--and the cost of domestic steel is already high. So, by levying tariffs, we would be increasing the material costs of non-steel manufacturers. If we do that, then we are less likely to protect non-steel manufacturers, and unemployment is a likely result.
Since non-steel manufacturers count as "other industrial sectors", non-steel manufacturers are definitely within the scope of the conclusion, and choice C definitely weakens the argument.
Choice D tells us that government subsidies are not the only factor that cause foreign steel to be so cheap....who cares? We don't really care about WHY foreign steel is cheap; all that matters is that it IS cheaper than domestic steel.
The question is fine, and choice C is indeed correct. (good job gmatmachoman!)
Pay attention to the scope of the conclusion:
Why? Well, because domestic steel is more expensive than foreign steel (second sentence of the argument).Therefore, to protect the steel industry in Turinan, as well as employment in other industrial sectors, the government of Turinan should levy heavy tariffs against foreign steel imports.
Choice C tells us that steel is a large proportion of non-steel manufactuters' material costs.
So, if we levy heavy tariffs on foreign steel, then the cost of purchasing foreign steel will increase--and the cost of domestic steel is already high. So, by levying tariffs, we would be increasing the material costs of non-steel manufacturers. If we do that, then we are less likely to protect non-steel manufacturers, and unemployment is a likely result.
Since non-steel manufacturers count as "other industrial sectors", non-steel manufacturers are definitely within the scope of the conclusion, and choice C definitely weakens the argument.
Choice D tells us that government subsidies are not the only factor that cause foreign steel to be so cheap....who cares? We don't really care about WHY foreign steel is cheap; all that matters is that it IS cheaper than domestic steel.
Kaplan Teacher in Toronto
-
gmatmachoman
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 2326
- Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
- Thanked: 173 times
- Followed by:2 members
- GMAT Score:710
@testluv
Many thx!!
Many thx!!

















