| Line | During the 1980s, many economic historians |
| studying Latin America focused on the impact of | |
| the Great Depression of the 1930s. Most of these | |
| historians argued that although the Depression | |
| (5) | began earlier in Latin America than in the United |
| States, it was less severe in Latin America and did | |
| not significantly impede industrial growth there. | |
| The historians argument was grounded in national | |
| government records concerning tax revenues and | |
| (10) | exports and in government-sponsored industrial |
| censuses, from which historians have drawn | |
| conclusions about total manufacturing output | |
| and profit levels across Latin America. However, | |
| economic statistics published by Latin American | |
| (15) | governments in the early twentieth century are |
| neither reliable nor consistent; this is especially | |
| true of manufacturing data, which were gathered | |
| from factory owners for taxation purposes and | |
| which therefore may well be distorted. Moreover, | |
| (20) | one cannot assume a direct correlation between |
| the output level and the profit level of a given | |
| industry as these variables often move in opposite | |
| directions. Finally, national and regional economies | |
| are composed of individual firms and industries, | |
| (25) | and relying on general, sweeping economic |
| indicators may mask substantial variations among | |
| these different enterprises. For example, recent | |
| analyses of previously unexamined data on textile | |
| manufacturing in Brazil and Mexico suggest that the | |
| (30) | Great Depression had a more severe impact on this |
| Latin American industry than scholars | |
| had recognized. |
加"GMAT小百科"小智微信
直接送200