Recently in City X, residential developers have stopped buying land, contractors are going without work for longer periods, and specialty workers such as electricians are relying more on less lucrative, existing-home remodeling jobs. There must be fewer new residents moving to City X than there were previously.



Which of the following, if true, indicates a flaw in the reasoning above?

This year several housing developments have gone on the market after being held up for months by legal red tape.
The average size of a new home has increased significantly over the past several years.
The population of City X is projected to grow by 4% this year, compared with only 3% for last year.
The cost of materials such as lumber and cement has decreased over the past year.
Sales of other big-ticket items, such as automobiles and boats, have remained steady over the past year.


As per Powerscore CR - Flaw in the reasoning should not bring outside information in choices, which this question does.
This question is more like weakening question.
_________________

Kudos button is not that far.

If the question were "weaken", then C would be a possible answer.

"C" is a conclusion that directly contradicts the conclusion reached in the passage. The passage concludes that fewer new residents moved to City X than previously. (C) says that more new residents are coming in.

A flaw in the reasoning can bring outside information if it helps explain the conclusion in a different way.
The passage says that because of poor jobs, fewer residents coming to the city.

(A) is saying okay, we have poor jobs but that's changing because a bunch of new projects just got onto the market that were "frozen" by legal red tape. Now they are open and job situation should improve. This reasoning would lead to a different conclusion and would reveal the "flaw" in the prior reasoning.

(C) doesn't really help us deal with the reasoning. It simply jumps to the conclusion and provides a conclusion that contradicts the one from the passage. Even so, population growth might not be directly comparable to "# of residents" coming to city X since population growth can either be INTERNAL or EXTERNAL.

The population might grow from within the city if everybody decides to have a lot of kids. Or it can be external with residents coming in from elsewhere. (C) doesn't fully capture just EXTERNAL which is what the reasoning from the passage is focused on.
_________________

... and more


Zeke Lee, GMAT Pill Study Method (Study Less. Score More.) | Download Ebook
- How A McKinsey Analyst Struggled with GMAT for 2 Yrs
- GMAT Score From 650 to 760 + 25 Minutes left on the exam! Wow!

GMAT Pill Reviews

in (A) " several " is mentioned, but in premise it's talking about the overall condition; how can several can refer to the general/overall situation?
_________________

" Make more efforts "
Press Kudos if you liked my post