Investigators in Greenavale

This is a modified version of OG 10 question. Check this link

https://gmatclub.com/forum/the-proposal- ... 69915.html

Greenvale plans to hire new investigators to decrease the fraud cases.
But no sufficient pay to for additional prosecutors and administrative assistants

The plan is foolish

We are asked to weaken the conclusion. We need to provide information that the plan will help reduce fraud cases

A - Strengthener
B - Irrelevant as same cannot be applied here
C - Irrelevant
D - Irrelevant
E - Weakens - If there is deterrent effect on fraud cases then it reduces the no of cases in the first step itself and there is no need to employ additional prosecutors/assistants

IMO E.

The proposal to hire twelve new fraud investigators in Greenvale is foolish. This is because there is sufficient funding to pay the salaries of the new investigators, but not to pay the salaries of additional prosecutors and administrative assistants to process the increased load of fraud cases that new investigators usually generate.

Which of the following, if true, will most seriously weaken the conclusion above?

A. Studies have shown that an increase in the number of a town's fraud investigators does not necessarily reduce fraud.
B. When one neighboring town increased the number of fraud investigators by 20 percent last year, it resulted in 30 percent more charges of fraud and 25 percent more convictions.
C. If funding for the new investigators' salaries is approved, support for other town services will have to be reduced during the next fiscal year.
D. In most United States towns, not all fraud cases result in charges, and not all charges result in trials.
E. Greenvale's ratio of fraud investigators to local officials has reached a level at which an increase in the number of investigators will have a deterrent effect on fraud.

A is beyond the scope of this argument
B is irrelevant
C is irrelevant
D is irrelevent
E is correct as it says that increasing the ratio of fraud investigators will have a deterrent effect on fraud. So this will not require a aubsequent increase in number of prosecutors and assistants.

Hence, E!