Editorial: Five years ago, Merryvale closed its municipal garbage-

­Editorial: Five years ago, Merryvale closed its municipal garbage-collection department and received several proposals for garbage-collection work from private contractors. Now the city pays less for garbage collection, the private contractor doing the work shows a profit, and residents say they are more satisifed with the garbage-collection service. This increase in effeciency constitutes a clear example of the benefits that result when competition motivates people to do high quality work at lower cost.

The conclusion of the editorial is the following:

This increase in effeciency constitutes a clear example of the benefits that result when competition motivates people to do high quality work at lower cost.

The editorial includes no statements that directly support the conclusion. After all, the passage does not directly mention "competition."

At the same time, the fact that the city "received several proposals for garbage-collection work from private contractors" does tend to indicate that competition between private contractors was involved in the process that led to the improved outcome described. So, the fact that it appears that a process involving some competition led to the outcome provides some support for the conclusion.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the editorials interpretation of the outcome of the change in Merryvale's garbage collection?

The correct answer will somehow strengthen the support for the conclusion.

(a) The company that now holds the garbage-collection contract consists entirely of former managers and employees of the municipal garbage-collection department.

My initial thought about this choice was that it might weaken the argument by showing that there was not competiition for the garbage-collection work since former city employees got the contract. I figured that it could be that they got the contract, not through competition, but rather by using their connections with the city.

However, the truth is that this choice does strengthen the argument by eliminating a variable. Here's how.

The information provided by this choice indicates that the same people who were doing the work before the town made the switch were doing the work afterward. Thus, this choice serves to rule out the possibility that what caused the improved outcome was a change in the people handling garbage collection.

By serving to rule out that possibility, this choice makes it more likely that what really caused improvement was competition motivating people to do higher quality work at lower cost.

So, this choice strengthens the support for the conclusion.

Keep.

(b) Over the last few years, changes in the types of industry located in Merryvale, have greatly changed industrial garbage-disposal work.

If anything, this choice weakens rather than strengthens the argument.

After all, if this choice is true, then it could be that the changes in garbage-disposal work it mentions, rather than the city's use of a private contractor, were the cause of the city paying less, the contractor showing a profit, and residents saying they are more satisfied.

That information would cast doubt on the conclusion by indicating that something other than increased efficiency resulting from competiition may have caused the improved outcome.

Eliminate.

(c) At the time that Merryvale closed its municipal garbage-collection department, opponents of the move argued that it would result in reduced wages and poorer benefits for the garbage-collection workers.

That fact that opponents of the move thought it would have a negative effect on garbage-collection workers doesn't mean that it resulted in beneficial increased efficiency. After all, the fact that someone thought that something would have negative effects clearly does not mean that it had positive effects.

Eliminate.

(d) Garbage from Merryvale can now be dumped at a landfill in a neighbouring county at a much lower cost than formerly.

This choice weakens the argument rather than strengthens it.

After all, if this choice is true, then it could be that the reason the city pays less, the contractor shows a profit, and the residents are more satisfied is simply that the cost of handling the garbage has decreased as a result of the use of the landfill in the neighbouring county. 

Of course, that information would cast doubt on the conclusion by indicating the improve outcome mentioned in the editorial may have resulted not from competition resulting in greater efficiency but from reduced landfill costs.

Eliminate.

(e) Many neighbouring towns followed Merryvale's example even before it was clear that the initial benefits from Merryvale's action would be sustainable­.

The fact that neighboring towns followed Merryvale's example doesn't mean that the editorial is correct about why things went better after the city switched to working with a private contractor. It merely indicates that neighboring towns had the impression that the strategy is beneficial, regardless of whether it really is.

Eliminate.

Correct answer: A­