Critical Reasoning

Thirty years ago, the percentage of their income that single persons spent on food was twice what it is today. Given that incomes have risen over the past thirty years, we can conclude that incomes have risen at a greater rate than the price of food in that period.
Which one of the following, if assumed, helps most to justify the conclusion drawn above?

1. The amount of food eaten per capita today is identical to the amount of food eaten per capita thirty years ago.

2. In general, single persons today eat healthier foods and eat less than their counterparts of thirty years ago

3. Single persons today, on average, purchase the same kinds of food items in the same quantities as they did thirty years ago.

4. The prices of nonfood items single person purchase have risen faster than the price of food over the past thirty years

5. Unlike single persons, families today spend about the same percentage of their income on food as they did thirty years ago.

Please explain. Appreciate your time.

OA : 3

C is correct here....all other are irrelevant

madhukumar_v wrote:Thirty years ago, the percentage of their income that single persons spent on food was twice what it is today. Given that incomes have risen over the past thirty years, we can conclude that incomes have risen at a greater rate than the price of food in that period.
Which one of the following, if assumed, helps most to justify the conclusion drawn above?

1. The amount of food eaten per capita today is identical to the amount of food eaten per capita thirty years ago.

2. In general, single persons today eat healthier foods and eat less than their counterparts of thirty years ago

3. Single persons today, on average, purchase the same kinds of food items in the same quantities as they did thirty years ago.

4. The prices of nonfood items single person purchase have risen faster than the price of food over the past thirty years

5. Unlike single persons, families today spend about the same percentage of their income on food as they did thirty years ago.

Please explain. Appreciate your time.

OA : 3

IMO, the answer is C

[spoiler]A: I initially chose this, but this isn't right, since this doesn't give us any information on prices.
B: Healthiness isn't mentioned anywhere.
C: Makes sense... if the same food items in the same quantities are purchased, these variables are held while the years change. We can make deductions about prices then.
D: Nonfood items are out of scope.
E: This would weaken, and not strengthen the conclusion.[/spoiler]

1. doesn't address the issue of cost
2. still doesn't address cost
3 because the argument is about percent of income (not dollar amount) it is always important to know that nothing else has changed other than the cost so this is relevant.
4. this deals with cost of nonfood - irrelevant.
5. the argument is about single people, not families so this is also irrelevant.