- DI & DS
- English Language
-
Intelligence & CR
- Alphabet & Number Ranking
- Analytical Reasoning
- Blood Relations Test
- Coding - Decoding
- Comparision of Ranks
- Direction Sense Test
- Mathematical Operation / Number Puzzles
- Series
- Sitting Arrangement
- Statement and Arguement
- Statement and Conclusion
- Statement and Course of Action
- Statement-Assumption
- Syllogism
-
Mathematical Skills
- Average
- Calender
- Clocks
- Geometry
- Height and Distance
- Logarithms
- Mensuration
- Mixtures and Alligations
- Number System
- Percentage
- Permutation and Computation
- Probability
- Profit and Loss
- Ratio and Proportion
- Set Theory
- Simple calculations
- Simple Equations
- Simple Interest and Compound Interest
- Time and Work
- Time, Speed and Distance
Loading
-
91.
-
92.
-
93.
Gopal: My father insists that the only way to get a good rank in the JMET examination is to work much harder than what I do at present. However, Alok and Raju, my two college seniors whom he coached for JMET last year got good ranks with less effort than what I am putting in.
[1] Gopal's primary purpose for making his point is to
(1) present the ideal method to prepare for JMET examination.
(2) present evidence that was previously overlooked.
(3) point out a logical flaw in his father's reasoning.
(4) draw an analogy to justify his method of preparation.[2] Which of the following statements would be the most effective rebuttal by Gopal's father to his arguments?
(1) Your two college seniors did not have to put in more effort as they had been preparing for this examination for a longer duration.
(2) I have been coaching students for this examination since its inception, and hence feel that you need to put in more effort.
(3) You need to provide much more detailed data to support your argument.
(4) My suggestion is not obviously wrong. There is only one way to find out if it is wrong, and that is to try it.asked in JMET
View Comments [0 Reply]
-
94.
With each passing day, it is getting easier to believe that the acceleration in India's economic growth from around 6% to 8% is here to stay. The hard part is trying to explain why this has happened. How this is explained is important since it has a bearing on our future policy.
As per conventional wisdom, India's growth accelerated to around 6% in the nineties from the historical rate of 3.5% because 'reforms' had unleashed the pent-up energies of Indian entrepreneurs long shackled by the socialist raj. It slowed subsequently because 'reforms' had lost momentum. The last three years' spurt in growth is the fortuitous result of a global economic boom. Once the world economy slows down, we will be back to 6% growth - unless we proceed with 'second generation' reforms.
However each of these propositions bristles with problems. It is not true that economic growth rate accelerated to 6% in the nineties. In fact, research has shown that the 'structural break' in India's economic growth occurred not in the early nineties but in the eighties, when economic growth accelerated to close to 6%. The growth in the first decade after reforms was not significantly different from the growth rate in the eighties. The 'reforms' in the sense of market-oriented or even pro-business policies did not commence overnight in 1991, but had commenced earlier. Economic policies in the nineties merely helped consolidate an underlying trend.
Subsequently, the world economy slowed down in 2001-03, which put the brakes on the Indian economy. Then came the crucial change, an acceleration to 8% in 2004-06. This cannot be ascribed to any fresh bout of ‘reforms’ or even to the global boom. There have been important structural changes in the economy. One is the rise in the savings rate from 23.5% in 2000-01 to 29.1 % in 2004-05. Most of this increase has come from the turnaround in public savings. Thanks to the rise in the savings rate, the economy has moved on to an altogether higher investment rate. The second structural change is enhanced export competitiveness, reflected in the rising share of exports. The total exports (trade plus invisible receipts) / GDP ratio has risen sharply from 16.9% in 2000-01 to 24.6% in 2005-06. A third, less noticed change in recent years is financial deepening. The bank assets / GDP ratio rose from 48% in 2000-01 to 80% in 2005-06 on the back of a surge in bank credit.
One factor is common to these three structural changes: lower interest rates. The decline in interest rates has helped fiscal consolidation, it has boosted firms' competitiveness and it has led to a huge increase in retail credit. Lower interest rates have been made possible by the rise in inflows on both current and capital accounts. The rise in inflows, in turn, reflects growing overseas confidence in India's economic potential - confidence created by two decades of economic growth of 6%. The sharp depreciation in the rupee in the nineties undoubtedly helped but it is worth recalling that a trend towards rupee depreciation was under way to the eighties itself.[1] The passage DOES NOT discuss
1. factors contributing to lower interest rates
2. the importance of world economy on India's reform rates
3. dimensions of structural changes in India's economic reforms
4. the role of the public sector in India's reforms[2] Which of the following statements is INCORRECT according to the passage?
1. Growth rate after reforms was similar to that in the eighties
2. Reforms in economic policies had started prior to the nineties
3. Structural changes in the Indian economy have helped lower interest rates
4. Increase in public savings rate has contributed to higher investment ratesasked in JMET
View Comments [0 Reply]
-
95.
-
96.