Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong' arguments and which is/are ‘weak' arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: The United States has launched what China calls the ‘largest trade war in economic history' and in its latest move targeted another $200 billion in Chinese export goods. The US-China spat is one of several trade fights picked by the protectionist President Donald Trump as his ‘America First' agenda disrupts trade relations among traditional allies. The growing share of international trade under threat has raised the prospect the escalating trade war could harm the global economy, shrinking investments and undermining supply chains. Why? Arguments: I. Several companies - including Total and Peugeot of France, and Russia's Lukoil - have said they are preparing to exit Iran ahead of US deadlines, the last of which is November 4. II. Trump argued the original deal from 2012 was lopsided in Seoul's favour but has also clouded the issue by appearing to link trade concessions to progress in his separate track of talks with nuclear-armed North Korea. III. Meanwhile, talks among the three NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) signatories, launched after Trump demanded an overhaul of the ‘terrible deal', have snagged notably owing to the US demands to increase American content installed in duty-free autos. 

The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong' arguments and which is/are ‘weak' arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: The United States has launched what China calls the ‘largest trade war in economic history' and in its latest move targeted another $200 billion in Chinese export goods. The US-China spat is one of several trade fights picked by the protectionist President Donald Trump as his ‘America First' agenda disrupts trade relations among traditional allies. The growing share of international trade under threat has raised the prospect the escalating trade war could harm the global economy, shrinking investments and undermining supply chains. Why? Arguments: I. Several companies - including Total and Peugeot of France, and Russia's Lukoil - have said they are preparing to exit Iran ahead of US deadlines, the last of which is November 4. II. Trump argued the original deal from 2012 was lopsided in Seoul's favour but has also clouded the issue by appearing to link trade concessions to progress in his separate track of talks with nuclear-armed North Korea. III. Meanwhile, talks among the three NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) signatories, launched after Trump demanded an overhaul of the ‘terrible deal', have snagged notably owing to the US demands to increase American content installed in duty-free autos.  Correct Answer None is strong.

The correct answer is option 1, i.e. None is strong.

We first make sure to read the statement carefully and then see what immediate inferences can be drawn based on our first reading. The next step is to look at the arguments given in the options, analyse them and see if they seem relevant with respect to the information/data provided to us. Finally, it is very important to study the question closely.

Following the aforementioned steps, we must analyse the given statement and the corresponding question closely.

From the question, it is evident that we must find a suitable answer to the question stated. Argument (I) captures the essence that several companies are preparing to exit Iran deal, it does not answer why the economy would be affected or investments might shrink. Arguments (II) and (III) can also be rejected. (II) and (III) also do not provide a suitable answer to the question stated. (II) focuses only on Trump's separate track of talks with North Korea whereas, (III) focuses only on one aspect of the duty-free autos that too within the context of America only.

Since neither of the arguments captures the essence of the question or give a satisfactory answer as to why the trade war could harm the global economy, shrink investments and undermine supply chains, we can mark the correct answer as option 1.

Related Questions

The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments and which is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: As a trade war looms, one of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s biggest weapons could be boycotts of American brands by his country’s legion of consumers. But Xi would also be risking collateral damage at home, The China operations of all-American brands ranging from Coca-Cola Co. and McDonald’s Corp. to Walt Disney Co. are co-owned by state-backed Chinese firms.  Which among the following arguments support the above statement in the best possible manner? Arguments: I. One of Coke’s main China partners is government-backed COFCO Corp., Shanghai Disneyland is part owned by a local consortium, and McDonald’s franchisee in the country is controlled by state-backed conglomerate Citic Ltd. and private-equity firm Citic Capital Holdings.  II. Even when Chinese companies don’t have direct ownership links with U.S. brands, boycotts or other non-tariff retaliation would hit the local partners of those American companies. III. The number of big clean wins in terms of striking against the other guy (American brands) - without accidentally punching your own guy (Chinese firms) in the face - is extremely large.
Statement: US President Donald Trump on Thursday cancelled the talks scheduled for June 12 with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. Which of the following objection(s) might be a probable reason(s) for the above-taken step by US President Donald Trump? I. The US President cited North Korea's recent "tremendous anger and open hostility" as the reason for him cancelling the summit. II. Donald Trump did not want to make any relations with North Korea and wants a nuclear war between the two nations and as a result has cancelled the summit. III. In a letter to the North Korean Leader, US president cited that the statements released by the North Korean Vice Minister Choe Son-hui represented "tremendous anger and open hostility", as a reason for cancelling the summit. IV. North Korea is the US’s rival and building any relationship with the Korean nation will bring economic harm to the US and as a result has cancelled the summit.
The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments and which is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: India has constituted a group to study the Special Economic Zones (SEZ) policy of India. The group will evaluate the SEZ policy and suggest measures to cater to the needs of exporters in the present economic scenario. This comes after the United States challenged India’s entire set of export subsidy programs in the WTO. Why is the United States unhappy with India? Arguments: I. Under the TIES, in 2017-18, exports recorded a growth of about 10 percent to USD 303 billion. II. According to them, India’s export subsidies do not let the developers of India have full freedom of subcontracting, importing without license, etc. III. According to them, India appears to be providing subsidies through various export promotion programs, SEZs, etc. which is harming their companies.
The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: India's burgeoning shadow finance sector is likely to face a shake-up after defaults at one major lender battered the nation's financial markets in the past week and reinforced worries about credit risk. Industry officials and experts say they expect Indian regulators to cancel the licences of as many as 1,500 smaller non-banking finance companies because they don't have adequate capital, and to also make it more difficult for new applicants to get approval. Which of the following argument(s) stated support(s) the given fact? Arguments: I. Better capitalised and more conservatively run finance firms are likely to swallow up an increasing number of smaller rivals. That could make it difficult for many small borrowers to get loans, especially in the countryside where two-thirds of India's 1.3 billion people live and put the brakes on a surge in private consumption with a knock-on effect on growth.  II. The shadow banking sector now comprises more than 11,400 firms with a combined balance-sheet worth 22.1 trillion rupees ($304 billion) and is less strictly regulated than banks. It has been attracting new investors, particularly as the nation's banks have had to slow their lending as they seek to work through $150 billion of stressed assets.  III. Nearly 11,000 of India's NBFCs are small and medium-sized businesses with an asset base of less than 5 billion rupees. But the top 400, many of which are backed by banks and finance companies, control about 90 percent of the assets under management.
The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments and which is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: State-run Energy Efficiency Services (EESL) has scrapped its second tender for procurement of 10,000 electric cars as the industry awaits clarification on specifications for chargers which will allow higher end, luxury automakers to come into the picture. This tender was floated in April and had been on hold after a preliminary pre-bid meeting. A similar tender was floated in August last year, and the rollout of 10,000 cars under the tender was expected to be completed by March 2019.  Why is EESL scraping the tender for procurement of 10,000 electric cars? Arguments: I. The share of luxury cars could go further up since it would be a good way of aggregating demand, Kumar said. This, however, strictly depends on the final order from DST. II. The tender had set aside 20% share of the total order for higher end and upgraded sedans category, which would allow foreign automakers like Nissan, Hyundai, Kia Motors to drive away with a fair share of the tender.  III. EESL said that the company has been awaiting clarification from the Department of Science & Technology (DST) to issue the standard norms for charging stations because of which the tender was first put on hold and now has been scrapped entirely.
The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments and which is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: As part of an effort to address the rising cases of divorces in the country, China's Jiangsu province has introduced a voluntary 'divorce test' for couples planning to end their marriage. Couples who score above 60 may be able to save their marriage, the civil affairs bureau said. Around 34 lakh Chinese couples filed for divorce in 2017. Is this sort of a decision/ test legitimate? Arguments: I. Yes, it is a valid decision and will give couples a chance to save their relationship. II. No, if a couple has decided to end their relationship, such a test won’t be beneficial. III. Yes, there is no harm in giving the test, if they want to separate their ways they can. But there might be a ray of hope that they decide to rethink their decision.
The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments and which is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: In the wake of globalization and digitization of the manner in which the business are conducted, the IT/ITES industry holds a significant place in the future business scenario. The Economic Survey 2017-18 mentioned that the IT/ITES services industry in India has scaled to around $140 billion during 2016-17. India today is globally the top outsourcing destination accounting for more than half of the market share. The IT/ITES industry has contributed around 7.7% of the country's GDP and according to IBEF is a key employment generator with a projection of creating 1.3-1.5 lakh new jobs annually. Which among the following arguments support the above statement in the best possible manner? Arguments: I. The Government has also provided considerable inputs to the industry with its various flagship programmes such as Digital India, Smart Cities, e-Governance coupled with a drive towards a cashless economy. II. The Government has been pro-active in considering demands of the industry and providing timely respite from the teething troubles under GST as well.  III. The IT/ITES industry is a labour intensive industry and a large scale employment generator. It is a common practice across the industry to provide various privileges and facilities to their staff in order to boost employee retention rates in their organisation.
The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments and which is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: World’s largest beer maker Heineken NV, the majority partner of United Breweries with Vijay Mallya, is understood to have sought legal opinion over its right to appoint a chairman at the Indian company. Heineken and some of its advisers believe that the shareholder agreement between Mallya and the beer giant has become null and void after India’s Enforcement Directorate attached his shares as part of its legal action against the liquor baron. Which among the following arguments support the above statement in the best possible manner? Arguments: I. UBL has stopped sharing confidential information with Mallya and has said that he is no longer privy to any strategic developments.  II. The board of UBL, India’s biggest beer company, had asked Mallya to either step down or appoint a nominee after the Securities and Exchange Board of India barred wilful defaulters from holding key board positions last year.  III. The company is functioning well and operations are in good shape but it is not good corporate governance to have an acting chairman for so long.
In each question below is given a statement numbered I, II and III. An assumption is something supposed or taken for granted. You have to consider the following assumption and decide which of the assumption is implicit in the statement. Statement: Every time Sri Lanka’s president, Mahinda Rajapaksa, turned to his Chinese allies for loans and assistance with an ambitious port project, the answer was yes. Yes, though feasibility studies said the port wouldn’t work. Yes, though other frequent lenders like India had refused. Yes, though Sri Lanka’s debt was ballooning rapidly under Rajapaksa.  Assumptions: I. China had a stake in Sri Lanka’s main port as well, China Harbor was building a new terminal there, known at the time as Colombo Port City. Along with that deal came roughly 50 acres, solely held by the Chinese company, where Sri Lanka had no sovereignty.  II. Sri Lankan officials are quick to point out that the agreement explicitly rules out China’s military use of the site. But others also note that Sri Lanka’s government, still heavily indebted to China, could be pressured to allow it.  III. The rising debt and project costs, even as the port was struggling, handed Sri Lanka’s political opposition a powerful issue, and it campaigned heavily on suspicions about China. Rajapaksa may lose the election.
The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments and which is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: In an interview with ETCIO.COM, Kuruvilla Markose, Chief Digital Officer of Titan shares his perspective on how technology is serving the company’s digital vision and the various initiatives that he is spearheading to hone the competitive edge of Titan. He is the first CDO to be appointed by the software conglomerate Tata Group. He is the man who has put the Titan’s digital transformation on fast-track. Which of the following arguments support the fact that Kuruvilla Markose has put Titan’s digital transformation on fast-track? Arguments: I. Markose is a man with a vision. He is the first CDO to be appointed by the software conglomerate Tata Group. He has spent his entire two decade long career in Tata Group. He has been in customer facing roles across different group companies.  II. His CDO role is horizontal and supports Titan’s myriad business lines: watches, jewellery, bags, perfumes wallets, and eye-wear. But the man and his words are grounded. Diny, as he is popularly known, is a man of measured speech and bearing. III. “Digital innovation”, according to Markose, is all about creating value for the customer. To him, customer centricity is the road to longevity in the digital age. Under his stewardship, Titan has launched a panoply of digital initiatives aimed at improving customer centricity.