Critical Reasoning

Mayor Delmont's critics complain about the jobs that were lost in the city under
Delmont's leadership. Yet the fact is that not only were more jobs created than were
eliminated, but the average pay for these new jobs has been higher than the average pay
for jobs citywide every year since Delmont took office. So there can be no question that
throughout Delmont's tenure the average paycheck in this city has been getting steadily
bigger.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument in the advertisement?
A. The average pay for jobs created in the city during the past three years was
higher than the average pay for jobs created in the city earlier in Mayor
Delmont's tenure.
B. Average pay in the city was at a ten-year low when Mayor Delmont took office.
C. Some of the jobs created in the city during Mayor Delmont's tenure have in the
meantime been eliminated again.
D. The average pay for jobs eliminated in the city during Mayor Delmont's tenure
has been roughly equal every year to the average pay for jobs citywide.
E. The average pay for jobs in the city is currently higher than it is for jobs in the
suburbs surrounding the city.

IMO D.

If the average pay of the eliminated jobs was higher than the average pay of the new jobs then that could weaken the argument. D eliminates this condition.

IMO A, it states that pay for newly created jobs has been increasing in past three years in mayor's term

I agree with PandeyVineet...D eliminates any other condition!!

satish.nagdev wrote:IMO A, it states that pay for newly created jobs has been increasing in past three years in mayor's term

I think A weakens the argument....

In my opinion D is the most logical one.