CR assumption type

[neha shekhawat]

The average hourly wage of television assemblers in Vernland has long been significantly lower than that in neighboring Borodia. Since Borodia dropped all tariffs on Vernlandian televisions three years ago, the number of televisions sold annually in Borodia has not changed. However, recent statistics show a drop in the number of television assemblers in Borodia. Therefore, updated trade statistics will probably indicate that the number of televisions Borodia imports annually from Vernland has increased.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. The number of television assemblers in Vernland has increased by at least as much as the number of television assemblers in Borodia has decreased.
B. Televisions assembled in Vernland have features that televisions assembled in Borodia do not have.
C. The average number of hours it takes a Borodian television assembler to assemble a television has not decreased significantly during the past three years.
D. The number of televisions assembled annually in Vernland has increased significantly during the past three years.
E. The difference between the hourly wage of television assemblers in Vernland and the hourly wage of television assemblers in Borodia is likely to decrease in the next few years.

I got confused between A and C.Still not able to find out that why is option A not correct answer?

[AjiteshArun]

I got confused between A and C.Still not able to find out that why is option A not correct answer?

The weakness in the argument is that it relies on a drop in the number of Borodian TV assemblers to say that the number of TVs imported must go up. But even if the number of Borodian TV assemblers goes down, those assemblers could produce more TVs if they become (for example) more efficient. Therefore, to remove this possibility and to say that the number of imported TVs will go up, we must assume that (the smaller number of) Borodian TV assemblers are not going to get faster at making TVs. That's for the third option.

For the first option: the argument does not need to assume that the number of assemblers in Vernland will go up as there are many ways that imports into Borodia could go up. For example, even if the total number of assemblers (even the total number of TVs made) in Vernland goes down, the number of TVs sent to Borodia could still go up.

[GMATGuruNY]

I explain this CR here:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/og-13-cr-113 ... 41622.html

why is option A not correct answer?

When the correct answer choice is negated, the conclusion will be invalidated.
A, negated:
The number of television assemblers in Vernland has increased by less than the number of television assemblers in Borodia has decreased.
If Borodia loses 100 assemblers, while Vernland gains 99 assemblers, it is still entirely possible that the lack of assemblers in Borodia will result in an increase in imports from Vernland.
Since the negation of A does not invalidate the conclusion, eliminate A.