conclusion: florida economy will decline

a)irrelevant (whether people moved greater distance or smaller distance, we are not concerned)
b)out of scope
c)suppose 10 years back, 100% people moved to florida. and people moving=100)
thus to years back, no. of people moved=100
now it says 97% move. but let total number = 1000 (number has increased)
thus people moving = 97% of 1000 which is 970 as compared to 100
thus economy won't decline.
d)out of scope
e)irrelevant
IMO C

Isnt C generic and out of scope ..it talks about all states...we are just concerned with FLORIDA

sid,

I am guessing you choose E... well atleast I had it my final 2. to explain why it is irrelevant, choice E talks about more people, question is specific to retirees. this kind of wrong answer is called shell game..

siddhans wrote:Isnt C generic and out of scope ..it talks about all states...we are just concerned with FLORIDA

P1: 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.
P2: Many local businesses in Florida cater to retirees
C1: These declines are likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses and therefore on the economy of Florida.

The first premise refers to people in all states. Of the people in the United States (all states) that move to a different state when they retire, the percentage who retired to Florida has decreased by three percentage points over the past ten years.

(C) "The number of people who moved from one state to another when they retired has increased significantly over the past ten years."

Answer choice (C) states that the number of people who moved from one state to another when they retired has increased significantly over the past ten years. As you noted this answer also refers to people in all states. This answer weakens the conclusion by implying that the total number of people retiring to Florida may have increased even if Florida's share of retirees that moved from one state to another decreased by 3 percentage points. See "Cans" explanation for a numerical example of this.

(E) "Florida attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state."

With regard to answer choice (E), I don't have an issue with the use of the word "people" rather than "retirees". Choice (E) refers not to more "people" but to more "people who move from
one state to another when they retire". This is the same group of people that is described in the argument.

My issue with (E) is that it refers to the total number of people (or retirees) that move to Florida without addressing the decrease in this number. The conclusion of the argument is based on the premise that there has been a 3 percentage point decrease in the people moving to Florida when they retire. Even if Florida attracts more retirees than any other state, there will still be a negative effect on the economy if that number decreases. This answer has no effect on the conclusion.