Critical Reasoning

Editorial: In order to preserve the health of its local economy, Metropolis should
not permit a Costmart warehouse department store to open wimincity limits. It has
been demonstrated that when Costmart opens a warehouse department store within
a city, the bankruptcy rate of local retailers increases in that city by twenty percent
over the next several years.

Which of the following questions would be most useful for evaluating the conclusion
of the editorial?

(A) Does the bankruptcy rate of local retailers in a city generally stabilize several
years after a Costmart warehouse department store opens?
(B) Do most residents of Metropolis currently do almost all of their shopping at
stores within the city limits of Metropolis?
(C) Have other cities that have permitted Costmart warehouse department stores
within city limits experienced any economic benefits as a result?
(D) Is the bankruptcy rate for local retailers in Metropolis higherthan in the average
city that has permitted a Costmart warehouse department store within city
limits?
(E) Does Costmart plan to hire employees exclusively from within Metropolis for
the proposed warehouse department store?


I chose the answer as B becuase [spoiler] if the locals are shopping at the local markets and shift to the Costmart warehouse, the bankruptcy rate will increase.If not then it won't affect. [/spoiler].
Also can you please give an idea of how to tackle this evaluate kind if questions?

Even i chose option b but OA is C ,

Option B : Do most residents of Metropolis currently do almost " all " of their shopping at
stores within the city limits of Metropolis .

Option C : Have other cities that have permitted Costmart warehouse department stores
within city limits experienced any economic benefits as a result?

It is immaterial whether the residents of metropolis do all of their shopping at the stores within the limits whereas with option C we can know what is the effect of allowing a costmart warehouse store.

kullayappayenugula wrote:Editorial: In order to preserve the health of its local economy, Metropolis should not permit a Constmart warehouse department store to open within city limits. Its has been demonstrated that when Costmart opens a warehouse department store within a city, the bankruptcy rate of local retailers increases in that city by twenty percent over the next several years.
Which of the following questions would be most useful for evaluating the conclusion of the editorial:

a. Does the bankruptcy rate of local retailers in a city generally stabilize several years after a Costmart warehouse department store opens?

b. Do most residents of Metropolis currently do almost all of their shopping at stores within the city limits of Metropolis?

c. Have other cities that have permitted Costmart warehouse department stores within city limits experienced any economic benefits as a result?

d. Is the bankruptcy rate of local retailers in Metropolis higher than in the average city that has permitted a costmart warehouse department store within city limits?

e. Does Costmart plan to hire employees exclusively from within Metropolis for the proposed warehouse department store?

This passage links COSTMART and LOCAL RETAILERS to the ENTIRE LOCAL ECONOMY.
The assumption is that there are NO OTHER FACTORS that affect the local economy.
It's entirely possible that the opening of a Costmart causes OTHER LOCAL BUSINESSES -- restaurants, parking lots, etc. -- to THRIVE, thereby IMPROVING the local economy.

EVALUATE CRs often provide answer choices phrased as QUESTIONS.
Rephrase such answer choices as STATEMENTS.
Rephrased as a statement, the correct answer choice will either STRENGTHEN or WEAKEN the conclusion.

Answer choice C, rephrased as a statement: Other cities that have permitted Costmart warehouse department stores within city limits have experienced economic benefits as a result.
If this statement is true, the conclusion that Costmart hurts the local economy is clearly WEAKENED.

The correct answer is C.

Answer choice B, rephrased as a statement: Most residents of Metropolis currently do almost all of their shopping at stores within the city limits of Metropolis.
It is given as a FACT that local retailers suffer when a Costmart opens.
Thus, who shops at these local retailers is irrelevant.
The only question here is whether the suffering of these local retailers is linked to the ENTIRE LOCAL ECONOMY.
Eliminate B.

Mitch,

EVALUATE CRs often provide answer choices phrased as QUESTIONS.
Rephrase such answer choices as STATEMENTS.Rephrased as a statement, the correct answer choice will either STRENGTHEN or WEAKEN the conclusion.

How do we know whether to strengthen or weaken the given argument?

I interpreted the question as "Answering which of the below question would give more clarity about the conclusion". I never saw it as strengthening or weakning question.

Thanks,
Yenu

the following is my steps of doing. pls, comment.

opening Costmart causes bankcrupcy----------> should not permit to open to develop the economy

prethink an assumption: there is no other benifit to the economy when Costmart open. it there is other benifit, we do not have the conclusion.

going to answer choices, C match.

choose C.

above is my thinking process, pls, comment.

Can anyone please explain why D is wrong?

Thanks

kheba wrote:Can anyone please explain why D is wrong?

Thanks

D and B are wrong for the same reason that we DON'T care whatever the current status of Metropolis retailers. We KNOW that, despite the current status, bankruptcy rate will increase i.e. retailer will be NEGATIVELY AFFECTED. To conclude the ECONOMY will be negatively affected we need to know whether someone is POSITIVELY AFFECTED or NOT.

I hope that resolves your doubt !!!