komal wrote:

arorag wrote:In the United States, of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired, the percentage who retired to Florida has decreased by three percentage points over the past ten years. Since many local businesses in Florida cater to retirees, this decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Florida attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state.
Incorrect : We need to compare Florida to Florida (over last ten years), not Florida with another state. Issue is about decrease in percentage of ppl moving to Florida over the last 10 yrs. Hence this one is Out of Scope.

B. The number of people who move out of Florida to accept employment in other states has increased over the past ten years.
Incorrect : Number of ppl moving OUT of florida is irrelevant.

C. There are far more local businesses in Florida that cater to tourists than there are local businesses that cater to retirees.
Incorrect : Comparison has to be made about economic effect on those businesses catering to retirees over the last ten years.

D. The total number of people who retired and moved to another state for their retirement has increased significantly over the past ten years.
Correct : The situation mentioned above can best be explained using an example :

Lets Assume that ten years back 100 people in the US moved out of state to retire
Out of 100 ppl 10% moved to florida = 10

This year 200 ppl in the US moved out of state to retire
Out of 200 ppl 7% moved to florida - 14

This year the number of ppl (14) moving to florida has increased even though percentage (less 3%) has decreased.

Answer choice (D) states just this and hence weakens the argument.

E. The number of people who left Florida when they retired to live in another state was greater last year than it was ten years ago.
Incorrect : This strengthens the argument.

Hope this helps : )