Economist: Our country needs as much capital as possible from overseas investors in order to sustain our economy. Hence, we cannot afford any reduction in the amount of capital that overseas investors have invested here. Therefore, to sustain our economy, we should pass laws making it much more difficult for overseas investors to remove their capital.

Summarize Argument
An Economist believes that to sustain the country’s economy, they should pass laws making it more difficult for investors to remove their capital. This is because the economy depends on overseas capital and they cannot afford any reduction in that investment.

Notable Assumptions
The Economist assumes that these laws would not reduce the net amount of investment from overseas investors.

A
To sustain its economy, the country needs to diversify its investments more evenly across the country’s industries.
While diversifying investments could help sustain the economy, this does not weaken the Economist’s argument. This is irrelevant to the argument’s premises and conclusion.
B
Laws that would make it more difficult for overseas investors to remove their capital would strongly discourage them from investing any additional capital.
This challenges the Economist’s assumption that the overall amount of investment in the country would *not* decrease if such laws were enacted. This suggests that the law would cause further investment to ultimately decrease
C
The historical periods during which the country’s economy had the highest rate of growth were those periods during which the amount of capital invested by overseas investors was highest.
If anything, this reinforces the idea that overseas investment is beneficial to the economy.
D
In countries other than the economist’s, passage of laws that made it very difficult for overseas investors to remove their capital have not entirely prevented the removal of capital invested by overseas investors.
While this questions the efficacy of the laws, it does not address whether they will sustain the economy or harm future investment. That is the crux of the argument.
E
Two years ago, the country enacted laws that place some restrictions on the removal of capital by overseas investors.
This does not challenge the economist’s reasoning. The economist just wants *stronger* laws.

17 comments

To test the claim that vitamin C is effective in treating acne, scientists administered it to one group of subjects and a placebo to a control group. The group receiving vitamin C had less severe acne during the study than did the control group. It was subsequently discovered, however, that half of the subjects in each group knew which kind of pill they were given. Among those who could not tell, no difference in the severity of acne was found between the two groups. Therefore, we can tentatively conclude that vitamin C has no real benefit in reducing the severity of acne.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author hypothesizes that vitamin C does not help reduce the severity of acne. This is based on a study showing no difference in the severity of acne between a group given vitamin C and a control group given a placebo.

Notable Assumptions
The argument assumes that there were no differences between the vitamin C group and the control group that could have made the vitamin C group’s acne more severe, thus masking the beneficial effect of vitamin C. The argument also assumes that before the study began, the vitamin C group did not start with more severe acne than the control group, which is another way beneficial effects of vitamin C could have been masked.

A
The subjects who were given vitamin C had a history of suffering from more severe acne than did the subjects receiving a placebo.
This explains how the two groups might end up with the same severity of acne even if vitamin C does help to reduce severity. Vitamin C may have reduced the severity down to the same level as that of the placebo group.
B
None of the subjects who were given vitamin C took additional doses of vitamin C on their own.
If this has any impact at all, this might strengthen the argument by showing that the vitamin C group didn’t take more vitamin C than they were supposed to. Learning that study subjects didn’t do things they weren’t supposed to doesn’t undermine an argument based on a study.
C
During the study, the severity of the subjects’ acne was lower than the national average.
How the subjects’ acne compared to the national average is irrelevant because we’re comparing the severity of the vitamin C group’s acne to the severity of the placebo group’s.
D
Some of the subjects who were given placebos consumed foods during the study that are naturally rich in vitamin C.
We have no reason to think this isn’t equally true of the vitamin C group. In addition, “some” subjects could just be a single person, which would not necessarily affect the overall average results observed in the placebo group.
E
Some of the subjects who knew their pills were placebos did not actually take the pills they were given.
The conclusion isn’t based on data about the people that knew they got the placebo or the vitamin C. It’s based on data about the people that didn’t know whether they got the placebo or the vitamin C.

17 comments

Consumer demand for personal computers continues to increase each year, which might lead one to think that the profits earned selling personal computers at the retail level are very high relative to total retail sales of personal computers. Yet the retail profit margin on personal computer sales is extremely low compared to that of other popular high-technology items.

"Surprising" Phenomenon
Why is the retail profit margin on personal computers very low compared to other popular hi-tech items, even though demand for personal computers increases every year?

Objective
This is an EXCEPT question. The four wrong answers will help explain why retail profits on personal computer sales might not be as high as we would expect given the demand for personal computers.

A
Rapid innovation in computer technology increases the likelihood of a store’s stock becoming obsolete.
This suggests computers purchased by a store for sale to consumers quickly become obsolete, which could make them harder to sell. If stores carry obsolete computers, this could depress the profits earned on the sale of computers.
B
Satisfaction with their first personal computer tends to make customers very loyal to that particular brand.
This suggests brands want first-time customers to have a good experience. But this doesn’t suggest that profits would be lower for personal computers than we would otherwise expect. If anything, brand loyalty might allow for higher prices on popular brands, increasing profits.
C
A customer needs more help from store employees when buying a personal computer than when buying other high-technology items.
This raises a reasonable possibility that selling personal computers requires hiring more employees, which raises the costs of selling those computers.
D
Many retail stores have low prices on personal computers in order to bring in customers who might buy software and accessories.
Stores might choose lower profits from personal computer sales in order to increase profit from other products.
E
An increase in the number of discount retail outlets selling personal computers has intensified the competition for customers.
Greater competition for personal computer sales will likely lead to lower prices, which reduces profit margin.

16 comments