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.

OA- E pls explain

Average income of kuptala=100
Population=2
and two peope have 100 as incme
income close to the average

that incomes in Kuptala, unlike those in Bahlton, might all be very close to the country’s average per capita income.

Average income of Bahlton=150
Population=2
one has income as 290 and other has income as only 10

so one persn live below povrty line in bahlton(assuming income of 10 is below poverty line)

The conclusion is two of the above mentioned theories must be wrong. How E is subjecting it to crticism?

viju9162 wrote:The conclusion is two of the above mentioned theories must be wrong. How E is subjecting it to crticism?

(E) is subjecting to criticism to the conclusion by stating that mentioned two theories are correct. Hence, conclusion drawn is not valid.

crackgmat007 wrote: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.

OA- E pls explain

From statements give, we can conclude the below information:
a) Country B Per Capita > Country K Per Capita
b) 50% of Country B is in poverty.
c) There is virtually no poverty in Country K.

b) is only possible when there is a big divide in wealth of rich and poor in Country B.
c) is only possible when most of the people earn the same.

E) answers that correctly.

I would go with option E as the correct option