Godrej Sample Verbal Questions

DIRECTIONS for questions 1 to 4: Read the given passage and answer the questions.
The World Trade Organisation (WTO) Ministerial Conference, which commenced in Hong Kong on December 13, 2005 adopted a declaration on December 18, 2005 after six days of acrimonious negotiations between developed and developing countries. Although initially there was a show of unity among developing countries especially on the issue of agriculture, which was reflected in the formation of the G-110, the final outcome of the Ministerial Declaration has been thoroughly anti-development. The Ministerial Declaration has not only failed to address substantially the concerns of developing countries but has actually paved the way for an eventual trade deal by the end of 2006, which is going to be severely detrimental to their interests. It is clear by now that the so-called "Development Round" launched in Doha in 2001 has been manipulated by developed countries, especially the United States and the members of the European Union, to push for further trade liberalization in developing countries while they continue to protect their economies through high subsidies and non-tariff barriers. Far from redressing the asymmetries of the global trading system, the Doha round seems to be heading for another catastrophe for the developing world. The E.U. stuck to its intransigent position on the deadline of 2013 for the elimination of export subsidies and developing countries gave up their demand for an earlier end date despite the initial collective efforts of the G-110. The gross inadequacy of this so-called "concession" can be understood from the fact that export subsidies comprise less than 2 per cent of the total farm subsidies in the developed world. There has been no concrete commitment on the reduction of domestic support other than export subsidies. The E.U. can continue to subsidize agriculture to the tune of 55 billion euros a year. The E.U. budget adopted recently ensures that nothing can be touched in the agriculture budget till at least 2013. The U.S. budget reconciliation process and the final vote in the Congress are set to extend domestic support to agriculture and counter-cyclical support to commodities up to around 2011. Even in the case of cotton, the agreement to eliminate subsidies by 2006 is restricted to export subsidies only and does not include other forms of domestic support. The U.S. refused to give duty-free access to exports from Least Developed Countries (LDCs) for 99.9 per cent of product lines and the final agreement was on 97 per cent of them, which would enable the U.S. and Japan to deny market access to LDCs in product lines such as rice and textiles. Much of the Aid for Trade for LDCs, which is being showcased by developed countries as a "development package", is disguised in conditional loan packages that are contingent upon further opening up of their markets. India's prime interest in agriculture was to ensure the protection of its small and marginal farmers from the onslaught of artificially low-priced imports or threats thereof. The proposals for agricultural tariff cuts, which are already on the table, are quite ambitious and the G-20 has already committed itself to undertake cuts to the extent of two-thirds of the level applicable to developed countries. Moreover, India has 100 per cent tariff lines bound in agriculture with the difference in the applied level and the bound level not very marked in many lines. In this context, the systemic problem faced by India's small and marginal farmers practicing subsistence agriculture will only get aggravated as a result of the impending tariff cuts that have been agreed upon. The government claims that the right to designate a number of agricultural product lines as special products based upon the considerations of food and livelihood security and to establish a special safeguard mechanism based on import quantity and price triggers, which have been mentioned in the Ministerial Text, adequately addresses the concerns of Indian farmers. The claim is questionable since the nature as well as the extent of protection under the category of special products remains restricted and the special safeguard mechanism, admittedly, is a measure to deal with an emergency and is of "a temporary nature". Therefore, seen in the light of the insignificant reductions in domestic farm subsidies by developed countries, tariff reduction commitments by developing countries seem to be totally unjustifiable. Developing countries have also agreed on the Swiss formula for tariff cuts under Non-Agricultural Market Access (NAMA). Although the coefficients will be negotiated later, it is unlikely that developed countries will agree upon sufficiently large coefficients for the formula that would ensure adequate policy space for developing countries in future to facilitate development of different sectors of their industries. The Ministerial Text's ritual references to "less than full reciprocity" and "special and differential treatment" fails to conceal the fact that the flexibilities provided by the July framework regarding the nature of the tariff reduction formula, product coverage, the extent of binding and the depth of cuts have been done away with. Moreover, no concrete commitment has been obtained in the Ministerial Text for the removal of the Non-Tariff barriers by developed countries, which is their principal mode of protection, despite developing countries making such major concessions on industrial tariff cuts. The fact of the matter is that developing countries have committed themselves to cuts in both agricultural and industrial tariffs, without getting anything substantial in return from developed countries. And India has facilitated the adoption of this bad deal in the backdrop of an acute crisis faced by Indian agriculture. Unfortunately, developing countries have lost the opportunity to rework fundamentally the iniquitous Agreement on Agriculture and protect the domestic policy space vis-a-vis industrial protection by developing countries, which could have been achieved by galvanizing the unity of the G-110.
deloitte article
  1. What was/were the flexibility/flexibilities envisaged by the July framework ?
    1. Depth of cuts
    2. Product coverage
    3. Tariff reduction formula
    4. All the above
    Answer:  Option D.
    Refer to latter part of the 2nd paragraph wherein all the three have been explicitly mentioned.
  2. Which one of the following statements is not correct as per the passage ?
    1. Aid which is given for the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) by the developed countries in the form of ‘developed package’ is conditioned upon further opening of their market.
    2. Reduction in the domestic farm subsidies by the developed countries is insignificant and the commitment made by the developing countries for tariff reduction is unjustifiable.
    3. India’s main interest in agriculture is to protect its small and marginal farmers from the onslaught of artificially low priced imports or threats of such nature.
    4. Developed countries have given commitment to the Ministerial Text on the removal of Non-Tariff barriers.
    Answer: Option  D.
    By elimination. Option 1-3 have been clearly mentioned, whereas option 4 has not been stated.
  3. Which claim of the Indian Government is questionable?
    1. Right to designate agriculture product lines as special products considering food and livelihood security
    2. India has facilitated the adoption of a beneficial deal for agriculture at WTO
    3. Formation of G-110 proves unity among developing countries
    4. Developing countries can negotiate large coefficients on the Swiss formula for tariff cuts
    Answer: Option  A.
    Fact based question. Sentence starting with,” This claim is questionable….” is preceded by option 1.
  4. Why is it that the imbalances of the global trading system appear to be catastrophic ?
    1. EU has not moved away from its declared position
    2. US refused to give duty free access to exports from LDCs
    3. The collective efforts of G-110 failed
    4. All the above
    Answer: Option  D.
    Once again all options find explicit mention in the 1st paragraph.
    DIRECTIONS for questions 5 to 9: In each question, a statement is followed by three courses of action numbered I, II and III. Assume everything in the statement to be true. Decide which of the three given suggested courses of action logically follows for pursuing.
  5. Statement: In one of the worst accidents on a railway level crossing, fifty people died when a bus carrying them collided with a running train.
    Courses of action : I. The train driver should immediately be suspended.
    II. The driver of the bus should be tried in court for negligence on his part.
    III. The railways authorities should be asked to man all its level crossings.
    1. None follows
    2. Only III follows
    3. Only I and II follow
    4. Only II and III follow
    Answer:  Option  D.
    The bus driver must have taken care of the distance to be maintained on the level crossing and The railway authorities must be more careful.
  6. Statement: There was a spurt in criminal activities in the city during the recent festival season.
    Courses of action : I. The police should immediately investigate into the causes of this increase.
    II. In future the police should take adequate precautions to avoid recurrence of such a situation during festivals.
    III. The known criminals should be arrested before any such season.
    1. None follows
    2. Only II and III follow
    3. Only I and II follow
    4. All follow
    Answer: Option  C.
    Statement Three does not follow because it would be excessively harsh on the part of the authorities to arrest someone merely on the grounds of a dubious past.
  7. Statement: The weather bureau has, through a recent bulletin, forecast heavy rainfall during the next week which may cause water logging in several parts of the city.
    Courses of action : I. The bulletin should be given wide publicity through the mass media.
    II. The civic authority should keep in readiness the pumping system for removal of water from these parts.
    III. The people should be advised to stay indoors during the period.
    1. All follow
    2. Only II follows
    3. Only I and II follow
    4. Only II and III follow
    Answer: Option  A.
    All the mentioned courses of action would go towards minimizing the potentially devastating effects of a flood. Hence 1.
  8. Statement: A mass mortality of shrimps in ponds on entire Andhra coast has recently been reported due to the presence of a virus.
    Courses of action : I. The water of the ponds affected should immediately be treated for identifying the nature of the virus.
    II. The catching of shrimps from the ponds should temporarily be stopped.
    III. The fishermen should be asked to watch for the onset of such phenomenon in nature.
    1. Only I follows
    2. All follow
    3. Only I and II follow
    4. Only II ad III follow
    Answer: Option B
    All three would help in the given situation.
  9. Statement: The world will have to feed more than 10 billion people in the next century, of whom half will be in Asia and will eat rice as their staple food.
    Courses of action : I. More funds should immediately be allocated for rice research to help ensure adequate supplies.
    II. The people in Asia should be encouraged to change their food habits.
    III. The rice should be grown in countries outside Asia to meet the demand.
    1. Only I and II follow
    2. All follow
    3. Only II and III follow
    4. Only I and III follow
    Answer: Option  D.
    Research is required to meet the demands. Second is not very logical. Help from other countries to be taken to meet the growing demand
    DIRECTIONS for questions 10: Pick out the most effective pair of words from the given choices (1), (2), (3) and (4) in each of these questions to make the sentence meaningfully complete.
  10. Part of the confusion in our societies _____________ from our pursuit of efficiency and economic growth, in the ____________ that these are the necessary ingredients of progress.
    1. stems — conviction
    2. derives — evaluation
    3. emerges — consideration
    4. extends — planning
    Answer: Option A.
    Between option 1 and 3, One is the better for stems and conviction go aptly with the content of the sentence.
Campus Placement ad
Rate Us