opulence2001
Thanks Received: 4
Forum Guests
 
Posts: 43
Joined: November 10th, 2010
 
 
 

PT39, S2, Q17 - Columnist: Over the last 20 years the demand

by opulence2001 Fri Nov 12, 2010 8:03 pm

Hi,

I was able to narrow down between B and D, but unfortunately I choose D. I was thinking that if Japanese consumers still did not want a similar North American car with left-side steering then this would completely undermine the argument, becuase even if they did what the columnist recommended it still would not increase sales of american cars in the Japanese market. Alas. This was wrong. Could you please explain why?
User avatar
 
noah
Thanks Received: 1192
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 1541
Joined: February 11th, 2009
 
This post thanked 3 times.
 
 

Re: Q17 - Columnist: Over the last 20 years the demand

by noah Sun Nov 14, 2010 5:35 pm

Your explanation of why (D) is correct is perfect for (B). But (D) is stronger than you need - and we're looking for a required (necessary) assumption. We don't need most Japanese to choose a North American car when faced with two choices that both have steering wheels on the right. We just need that the fact that a steering wheel is on the left to negatively impact a Japanese consumer's estimation of a car.

The core of this argument is:

Japanese drive on left --> The fact that North American cars have steering wheels on the left is an obstacle to increased sales in Japan.

If we negate (B), Japanese would be inclined to buy cars with steering wheels on the left, and the argument wouldn't make sense!

If we negate (D), North American cars with steering wheels on the right would not be more popular than Japanese cars, but perhaps they'd sell well enough to see sales rise.

(A) is out of scope. Reliability? Fuel Efficiency?

(C) is irrelevant. Why the Japanese prefer steering wheels on the left is not important to the argument.

(E) may sound tempting, but "needs" is very vague. Perhaps which side the steering wheel is on is a stylistic issue, not a "need" issue. Furthermore, the "only" in this answer is problematic. Why is it required that what (E) says be the ONLY way to deal with the trade imbalance?

Does that clear it up?
 
opulence2001
Thanks Received: 4
Forum Guests
 
Posts: 43
Joined: November 10th, 2010
 
 
 

Re: PT39, S2, Q17 - Columnist: Over the last 20 years the demand

by opulence2001 Thu Dec 16, 2010 7:23 pm

I can see clearly now...

Thx! :D
User avatar
 
WaltGrace1983
Thanks Received: 207
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 837
Joined: March 30th, 2013
 
This post thanked 1 time.
 
trophy
Most Thanked
trophy
Most Thankful
trophy
First Responder
 

Re: Q17 - Columnist: Over the last 20 years the demand

by WaltGrace1983 Mon Apr 14, 2014 3:58 pm

I'd like to add a couple of things.

(D) We don't know if these people who are given the choice are even the one's buying the cars. Remember that we are talking about sales imbalances, not personal preference imbalances. Also, as Noah said, the "most" here is very strong and just because "most" would buy the North American model does not mean that they chose the North American model BECAUSE OF the steering wheel. Maybe they want to look cool in front of their friends that they have a "foreign" car. Maybe the steering wheel isn't even an obstacle at all.

(E), if anything, also seems to have the arrow backwards. We are trying to conclude something about lessening the trade imbalance. In other words, we want something that would say ________ → would lessen the trade imbalance. (E) says that IF the trade imbalance is lessened, it must be because _________. This is pretty irrelevant because the trade imbalance ISN'T lessened.