Ok... Got it.. Thanks..!!!!
Is the below reasoning correct to eliminate C..
"since farmers refused to bring cotton acreage out of production that means no cotton was provided to the market by farmers, hence, government orders were not able to apply to the cottons by farmers. That weakens option C, as no cotton( of farmers) in the market then to whom would the government orders be applied."
sorry but thats not the correct reasoning.
i will give one analogous example:
==>let suppose there are 5 students in GMAT club and BUNUEL is the only MODERATOR available to help.
==>now suppose each 5 student they initially used to ask 5 questions daily ...which BUNUEL was able to handle easily.
==>after some day question asked by each student increased to 10===> which BUNUEL was unable to handlle.
==>So BB MODERATOR in order to cope up this situation he announced that .....student who will reduce their question by 50 percent or more...will receive 5 kudos.
==>AFTER FEW days it was found that BUNUEL was comfortable and was back to normal.
==>BB concluded that because of this policy of kudos.....everything was back to normal.
now option C analogous will be:
nobody followed BBs policy.===>so what does this mean===>this mean they continued asking 10 question each day.====>but still if BUNUEL is comfortable in his work.,then dont you think that this is weakening the conclusion.
so similarly in our question...cotton is available in the market but the farmers are not following the government acreage policy.
hope it helps
THanks again for the explanantion...
In C, it is not stated that cotton is available in the market, only the prices regained their level...
THe farmers did not agree to bring cotton out of production, thought the government policy was not applied.. This is weakening as something else rose the prices of cotton...