Critical Reasoning

Demographers doing research for an international economics newsletter claim that the average per capita income
in the country of Kuptala is substantially lower than that in the country of Bahlton. They also claim, however, that
whereas poverty is relatively rare in Kuptala, over half the population of Bahlton lives in extreme poverty. At least
one of the demographers' claims must, therefore, be wrong. The argument above is most vulnerable to
which of the following criticisms?
A. It rejects an empirical claim about the average per capita incomes in the two countries without making any
attempt to discredit that claim by offering additional economic evidence.
B. It treats the vague term "poverty" as though it had a precise and universally accepted meaning.
C. It overlooks the possibility that the number of people in the two countries who live in poverty could be the same
even though the percentages of the two populations that live in poverty differ markedly.
D. It fails to show that wealth and poverty have the same social significance in Kuptala as in Bahlton.
E. It does not consider the possibility that incomes in Kuptala, unlike those in Bahlton, might all be very close to the
country's average per capita income.

I'd say E. The argument doesn't take into account that per capita income is an average. Couldn't it be the case that there are some mega-billionaires in Bahlton that throw off the average?