The economy inChinais booming; ---- many foreign investors are planning to enter Chinas market.a)nonethelessb)even ifc)so as tod)in addition toe)thats whyCorrect answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?

EduRev

All Courses

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

Verbal Exam > Verbal Questions > The economy inChinais booming; ---- many fore...

The economy in China is booming; ---- many foreign investors are planning to enter China's market.

a)
nonetheless
b)
even if
c)
so as to
d)
in addition to
e)
that's why

Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?

Join for Free

Join for Free

Verified Answer

The economy inChinais booming; ---- many foreign investors are plannin...

The economy in China is booming; Thats why many foreign investors are planning to enter China's market

View all questions of this test

Most Upvoted Answer

The economy inChinais booming; ---- many foreign investors are plannin...

Answer:

The correct answer is option E, "that's why."

Explanation:

The phrase "the economy in China is booming" suggests a cause-and-effect relationship with the second part of the sentence, which describes foreign investors planning to enter China's market. Option E, "that's why," is a common way to express this relationship by indicating that the first clause is the reason for the second. It implies that the growing economy is the motivation or driving force behind the interest from foreign investors.

Other options do not fit as well with the context of the sentence:

A) Nonetheless: This word suggests a contrast or contradiction, which doesn't make sense in this case because the two parts of the sentence are related.

B) Even if: This phrase introduces a hypothetical scenario, which is not relevant to the actual situation described in the sentence.

C) So as to: This phrase indicates a purpose or intention, which is not clearly stated in the sentence.

D) In addition to: This phrase suggests an additional factor, which doesn't necessarily explain why foreign investors are interested in China's market.

View all answers Start learning for free

Explore Courses for Verbal exam

Similar Verbal Doubts

In the decades following World War II, American business had undisputed control of the world economy, producing goods of such high quality and low cost that foreign corporations were unable to compete. But in the mid-1960s the United States began to lose its advantage and by the 1980s American corporations lagged behind the competition in many industries. In the computer chip industry, for example, American corporations had lost most of both domestic and foreign markets by the early 1980sThe first analysts to examine the decline of American business blamed the U.S. government. They argued that stringent governmental restrictions on the behaviour of American corporations, combined with the wholehearted support given to foreign firms by their governments, created and environment in which American products could not compete. Later analysts blamed predatory corporate raiders who bought corporations, not to make them more competitive in the face of foreign competition, but rather to sell off the most lucrative divisions for huge profits.Still later analysts blamed the American workforce, citing labour demands and poor productivity as the reasons American corporations have been unable to compete with Japanese and European firms. Finally, a few analysts even censured American consumers for their unpatriotic purchases of foreign goods. The blame actually lies with corporate management, which has made serious errors based on misconceptions about what it takes to be successful in the marketplace. These missteps involve labour costs, production choices, and growth strategies.Even though labour costs typically account for less than 15% of a products total cost, management has been quick to blame the costs of workers wages for driving up prices, making American goods uncompetitive. As a result of attempts to minimize the cost of wages, American corporations have had trouble recruiting and retaining skilled workers.The emphasis on cost minimization has also led to another blunder: an over-concentration on high technology products. Many foreign firms began by specializing in the mass production and sale of low technology products, gaining valuable experience and earning tremendous profits. Later, these corporations were able to break into high technology markets without much trouble; they simply applied their previous manufacturing experience and ample financial resources to the production of higher quality goods. American business has consistently ignored this very sensible approach. The recent rash of corporate mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. has not helped the situation either. While American firms have neglected long-range planning and production, preferring instead to reap fast profits through mergers and acquisitions, foreign firms have been quickto exploit opportunities to ensure their domination over future markets by investing in the streamlining and modernization of their facilities.Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig QuetionsQ.With which of the following general statements would the author most likely NOT agree?

View answer

In the decades following World War II, American business had undisputed control of the world economy, producing goods of such high quality and low cost that foreign corporations were unable to compete. But in the mid-1960s the United States began to lose its advantage and by the 1980s American corporations lagged behind the competition in many industries. In the computer chip industry, for example, American corporations had lost most of both domestic and foreign markets by the early 1980s.The first analysts to examine the decline of American business blamed the U.S. government. They argued that stringent governmental restrictions on the behaviour of American corporations, combined with the wholehearted support given to foreign firms by their governments, created and environment in which American products could not compete. Later analysts blamed predatory corporate raiders who bought corporations, not to make them more competitive in the face of foreign competition, but rather to sell off the most lucrative divisions for huge profits.Still later analysts blamed the American workforce, citing labour demands and poor productivity as the reasons American corporations have been unable to compete with Japanese and European firms. Finally, a few analysts even censured American consumers for their unpatriotic purchases of foreign goods. The blame actually lies with corporate management, which has made serious errors based on misconceptions about what it takes to be successful in the marketplace.These missteps involve labour costs, production choices, and growth strategies. Even though labour costs typically account for less than 15% of a products total cost, management has been quick to blame the costs of workers wages for driving up prices, making American goods uncompetitive. As a result of attempts to minimize the cost of wages, American corporations have had trouble recruiting and retaining skilled workers. The emphasis on cost minimization has also led to another blunder: an over-concentration on high technology products.Many foreign firms began by specializing in the mass production and sale of low technology products, gaining valuable experience and earning tremendous profits. Later, these corporations were able to break into high technology markets without much trouble; they simply applied their previous manufacturing experience and ample financial resources to the production of higher quality goods.American business has consistently ignored this very sensible approach. The recent rash of corporate mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. has not helped the situation either. While American firms have neglected long-range planning and production, preferring instead to reap fast profits through mergers and acquisitions, foreign firms have been quickto exploit opportunities to ensure their domination over future markets by investing in the streamlining and modernization of their facilities.Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig QuetionsQ.The passage suggests that compared to Japanese workers, American workers are often considered

View answer

Once surrounded and protected by vast wilderness, many of the national parks are adversely affected by activities outside their boundaries. The National Park Organic Act established the national park system and empowered the Secretary of the Interior to manage activities within the parks. Conditions outside park boundaries are not subject to regulation by the Park Service unless they involve the direct use of park resources. Several approaches to protecting the national parks from external degradation have been proposed, such as one focusing on enacting federal legislation granting the National Park Service broader powers over lands adjacent to the national parks. Legislation addressing external threats to the national parks twice passed the House of Representatives but died without action in the Senate. Also brought to the table as a possible remedy is giving the states bordering the parks a significant and meaningful role in developing federal park management policy. Because the livelihood of many citizens is linked to the management of national parks, local politicians often encourage state involvement in federal planning. But, state legislatures have not always addressed the fundamental policy issues of whether states should protect park wildlife. Timber harvesting, ranching and energy exploration compete with wildlife within the local ecosystem. Priorities among different land uses are not generally established by current legislation. Additionally, often no mechanism exists to coordinate planning by the state environmental regulatory agencies. These factors limit the impact of legislation aimed at protecting park wildlife and the larger park ecosystem. Even if these deficiencies can be overcome, state participation must be consistent with existing federal legislation. States lack jurisdiction within national parks themselves, and therefore state solutions cannot reach activities inside the parks, thus limiting state action to the land adjacent to the national parks. Under the supremacy clause, federal laws and regulations supersede state action if state law conflicts with federal legislation, if Congress precludes local regulation, or if federal regulation is so pervasive that no room remains for state control. Assuming that federal regulations leave open the possibility of state control, state participation in policy making must be harmonized with existing federal legislation. The residents of states bordering national parks are affected by park management policies. They in turn affect the success of those policies. This interrelationship must be considered in responding to the external threats problem. Local participation is necessary in deciding how to protect park wildlife. Local interests should not, however, dictate national policy, nor should they be used as a pretext to ignore the threats to park regions. Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the following Questions: In the context of the passage, the phrase external degradation (lines 8-9) refers to which of the following

View answer

Once surrounded and protected by vast wilderness, many of the national parks are adversely affected by activities outside their boundaries. The National Park Organic Act established the national park system and empowered the Secretary of the Interior to manage activities within the parks. Conditions outside park boundaries are not subject to regulation by the Park Service unless they involve the direct use of park resources. Several approaches to protecting the national parks from external degradation have been proposed, such as one focusing on enacting federal legislation granting the National Park Service broader powers over lands adjacent to the national parks. Legislation addressing external threats to the national parks twice passed the House of Representatives but died without action in the Senate. Also brought to the table as a possible remedy is giving the states bordering the parks a significant and meaningful role in developing federal park management policy. Because the livelihood of many citizens is linked to the management of national parks, local politicians often encourage state involvement in federal planning. But, state legislatures have not always addressed the fundamental policy issues of whether states should protect park wildlife. Timber harvesting, ranching and energy exploration compete with wildlife within the local ecosystem. Priorities among different land uses are not generally established by current legislation. Additionally, often no mechanism exists to coordinate planning by the state environmental regulatory agencies. These factors limit the impact of legislation aimed at protecting park wildlife and the larger park ecosystemEven if these deficiencies can be overcome, state participation must be consistent with existing federal legislation. States lack jurisdiction within national parks themselves, and therefore state solutions cannot reach activities inside the parks, thus limiting state action to the land adjacent to the national parks. Under the supremacy clause, federal laws and regulations supersede state action if state law conflicts with federal legislation, if Congress precludes local regulation, or if federal regulation is so pervasive that no room remains for state control. Assuming that federal regulations leave open the possibility of state control, state participation in policy making must be harmonized with existing federal legislation.The residents of states bordering national parks are affected by park management policies. They in turn affect the success of those policies. This interrelationship must be considered in responding to the external threats problem. Local participation is necessary in deciding how to protect park wildlife. Local interests should not, however, dictate national policy, nor should they be used as a pretext to ignore the threats to park regions.Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig QuetionsQ. What is the main purpose of the author in writing the passage?

View answer

The paradox of tolerance admonishes us that tolerance of the intolerant leads to intolerance. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the constitutions and laws of Western European democracies that adhere to the principle of freedom of speech all heed the warning of this conundrum and do not afford legal protection to extremist speech. While in Western European democracies, the speech of nondemocratic extremists has been successfully outlawed, in the United States the first amendment right to freedom of speech has been interpreted to encompass radical oration. The traditional justifications of this American stance originate in the belief that speech is entitled to greater tolerance than other kinds of activity. They are based on the belief that speech itself is valuable, and thus ascribe positive value to a very broad range of speech.According to the classical model, freedom of speech serves an indispensable function in the process of democratic self-government. From this perspective, the free speech principle need only protect political speech, comprised of all the facts, theories, and opinions relating to any issue on which the citizens must vote. Proponents of this view insist that even extremist views cannot be concealed from voting citizens, if these views bear on any public issue before them.Protection of free speech serves the collective self-interests of a selfgoverning society made up of all rational, equal, and fully participating citizens who take their civic duties seriously. The fortress model is built on a foundation of pessimism, individualism, relativism, and self-doubt. At its deepest level, the fortress model values freedom of speech as a necessary precondition to the discovery and preservation of truth, but even at this level the function of speech remains primarily negative. From this perspective, the government and a majority of the people pose a great danger of intolerance. In spite of the high probability that their beliefs will eventually prove to be false, it is argued, people nonetheless tend to feel certain about them and, consequently, feel justified in requiring others to conform. Thus, the fortress models prescription for combating the tendency to censor nonconforming views is to overprotect speech by providing a broad buffer zone that encompasses extremist speech because its protection substantially diminishes the probability that inherently valuable speech will be suppressed. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ. All of the following actions have been put forth by one or another group in this country as being of value in our society. Which actions would violate a principle of the classical model of free speech?

View answer

The economy inChinais booming; ---- many foreign investors are planning to enter China's market.a)nonethelessb)even ifc)so as tod)in addition toe)that's whyCorrect answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
The economy inChinais booming; ---- many foreign investors are planning to enter China's market.a)nonethelessb)even ifc)so as tod)in addition toe)that's whyCorrect answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? for Verbal 2025 is part of Verbal preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the Verbal exam syllabus. Information about The economy inChinais booming; ---- many foreign investors are planning to enter China's market.a)nonethelessb)even ifc)so as tod)in addition toe)that's whyCorrect answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for Verbal 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for The economy inChinais booming; ---- many foreign investors are planning to enter China's market.a)nonethelessb)even ifc)so as tod)in addition toe)that's whyCorrect answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for The economy inChinais booming; ---- many foreign investors are planning to enter China's market.a)nonethelessb)even ifc)so as tod)in addition toe)that's whyCorrect answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for Verbal. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for Verbal Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of The economy inChinais booming; ---- many foreign investors are planning to enter China's market.a)nonethelessb)even ifc)so as tod)in addition toe)that's whyCorrect answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of The economy inChinais booming; ---- many foreign investors are planning to enter China's market.a)nonethelessb)even ifc)so as tod)in addition toe)that's whyCorrect answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for The economy inChinais booming; ---- many foreign investors are planning to enter China's market.a)nonethelessb)even ifc)so as tod)in addition toe)that's whyCorrect answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of The economy inChinais booming; ---- many foreign investors are planning to enter China's market.a)nonethelessb)even ifc)so as tod)in addition toe)that's whyCorrect answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice The economy inChinais booming; ---- many foreign investors are planning to enter China's market.a)nonethelessb)even ifc)so as tod)in addition toe)that's whyCorrect answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice Verbal tests.

Explore Courses for Verbal exam