ssgmatter wrote:@kevin....so this means that option E explicitly says that employment will increase instead of decrease as more farmers would be coming to the cities in search of more money....

Please correct me if i go wrong in my reasoining here...

Many thanks!

as per the conclusion: high tariff > prevents exports of unproc cashews > keeps urban proc plants running > maintains urban employment

A provides an added benefit of processing cashews, doesn't talk about tariffs or 'urban' employment - IRR

B other countries' subsidy will help their employment, not Kernland's - IRR

C ratio of people engaged in farming to those in processing says urban employment less important - Don't Know

D shows a benefit of keeping high tariffs - domestic plants sell proc cashews at higher rates, so keeps business and employment running - STR

E suggests that: lesser profit > farmers abandon and go to city (tariffs still exist) > no unproc cashews for urban proc plants > urban unemployment, AND unemployed farmers also add to the unemployed population - WKN

option E is saying that tariff is NOT the only thing that prevents urban unemployment, other factors (unconsidered or failed to be accounted) can also cause urban unemployment while the high tariff exists, in fact there can be many that can cause the urban plants to shut down.

a request to few others - please provide reasoning for choosing an answer choice over others if possible; simply putting forth an answer is just not convincing and becomes a majority bias issue. learning to recognize wrong answer choices is equally important when we have to eliminate them while making educated guesses.

thanks