V1(BY: bit00000 ) S国家准备降低国家的贸易赤字by降低糖的价格，糖是这个国家的主要出口产品。这样的策略会让他们在全球市场上更有竞争里。降价能使销量(还是利润?)增加，并且这样的增加能降低贸易赤字(通过利润增加?)。 求考苦 后面有点记不清 但是整个逻辑很简单。。
The following appeared as part of an article in a weekly newsmagazine：
“The country of Sacchar can best solve its current trade deficit problem by lowering the price of sugar, its primary export. Such an action would make Sacchar better able to compete for markets with other sugar-exporting countries. The sale of Sacchar’s sugar abroad would increase, and this increase would substantially reduce Sacchar’s trade deficit.”
1、比起价格下降而带来的损失产量提高的影响是不是更大不是定数Increasing sales by lowering the price of sugar will not yeild an increase in income unless the increase in sales is sufficient to overcome the loss in income due to the lower price. in the absence of ...
3、降低进口可能是一个更好的办法A trade-deficit occurs when a country spends more on imports than it earns from exports. However, the author provides no evidence that substantiates this assumption. It is possible that revenues from imports will increase dramatically in the near future; if so, the course of action proposed by the author might be unnecessary to solve Sacchar's trade deficit proplem. To the extent that this is the case...
The author of this article argues that the country of Sacchar can best solve its current trade deficit problem by lowering the price of its main export, sugar. The line of reasoning is that this action would make Sacchar more competitive with other sugar-exporting countries, thereby increasing sales of Sacchar’s sugar abroad and, in turn, substantially reducing the trade-deficit. This line of reasoning is unconvincing for a couple of reasons.
In the first place, this argument is based on an oversimplified analysis of the trade deficit problem Sacchar currently faces. A trade-deficit occurs when a country spends more on imports than it earns from exports. The author’s argument relies on the assumption that earnings from imports will remain constant. However, the author provides no evidence that substantiates this assumption. It is possible that revenues from imports will increase dramatically in the near future; if so, the course of action proposed by the author might be unnecessary to solve Sacchar’s trade deficit problem. Conversely, it is possible that revenues from imports are likely to decrease dramatically in the near future. To the extent that this is the case, lowering sugar prices may have a negligible countervailing effect, depending on the demand for Sacchar’s sugar.
In the second place, increasing sales by lowering the price of sugar will not yield an increase in income unless the increase in sales is sufficient to overcome the loss in income due to the lower price. This raises three questions the author fails to address. First, will a price decrease in fact stimulate demand? Second, is demand sufficient to meet the increase in supply? Third, can Sacchar increase the sugar production sufficiently to overcome the deficit? In the absence of answers to these questions, we cannot assess the author’s proposal.
In conclusion, the author provides an incomplete analysis of the problem and, as a result, provides a questionable solution. To better evaluate the proposal, we would need to know how revenues from imports are likely to change in the future. To strengthen the argument, the author must provide evidence that demand is sufficient to meet the proposed increase in supply, and that Sacchar has sufficient resources to accommodate the increase.
The author argues that lowering the price of sugar, the primary export of Sacchar, can help to substantially reduce Sacchar’s trade deficit, because the lowering price can make Sacchar better able to compete with other sugar-exporting countries and thus the sale of sugar abroad will increase, which can help to reduce the trade deficit of the country. The claim seems appealing at a first glance, but after reflection we will find several flaws during the argument.
In the first place, the author assumes that the overall output of the sugar can be easily increased to meet the increasing demand due to the low price. However, no evidence in the argument supports that assumption. It is possible that the overall output of the sugar in Sacchar has already reached the maximum to achieve the maximum profit and it cannot be increased and more. Therefore the conclusion is weakened in this case because of the lower price and same output.
In the second place, the author assumes that the price of sugar can be lowered, which cannot be inferred from the argument as well. It is possible that there is little profit for the manufacture to produce sugar and if the price is cut any more there will be no profit to produce sugar in Sacchar. In this case, the conclusion is weakened as the lower price of sugar will cause no manufactures in Sacchar to produce sugar.
Furthermore, there is no essential link between the export and the trade deficit. The reduction of trade deficit can be achieved by decreasing import, which may be a easier solution to reduce Sacchar’s trade deficit.
In conclusion, lowering price of the sugar in Sacchar will not necessarily lead to a reduction of Sacchar’s trade deficit. To strengthen the argument, the author needs to verify that there is no other solutions to reduce trade deficit in Saccharand that both lowering price of sugar and increasing output of sugar can be easily achieved.