It is clear that the nation’s labor force will diminish during the next 20 years. Population growth in our country reached its apex in 1961, and by the late 1960s more heads of households were employed in this country than ever before. This growth rate has slackened significantly, and by 1995 the number of households overall will be reduced, thus decreasing the number of potential employees in the work force.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion drawn above?


Employers who do not wish to scale back the size of their operations will have to pursue qualified employees more aggressively after 1995.

Experts predict that after a downturn in the quality of employee benefits during the 1980s and early 1990s, the overall quality of benefits offered to employees will rise by 1995.

The proportional representation of heads of households in the labor market increased between the years 1988 and 1992.

It has become progressively harder since the 1960s for households to subsist on a single earner’s pay, so an increasing proportion of the labor market are those who are not heads of households.

By 1995 there will be far more people managing their own businesses than there have ever been previously.

To weaken the argument we need to show that there are others than household in the labour force D gives the explanation.

Yes, agree with D.
People other than heads of household will work thus increasing the workforce.

D weakens the argument

'D' it is.