ttanvir wrote:
Editorial: In Ledland, unemployed adults receive government assistance. To reduce unemployment, the government proposes to supplement the income of those who accept jobs that pay less than government assistance, thus enabling employers to hire workers cheaply. However, the supplement will not raise any worker's income above what government assistance would provide if he or she were not gainfully employed. Therefore, unemployed people will have no financial incentive to accept jobs that would entitle them to the supplement.
Which of the following, if true about Ledland, most seriously weakens the argument of the editorial?
Great question because it is not always easy to understand how C weakens the argument. It is also hard to eliminate choices.
(A) The government collects no taxes on assistance it provides to unemployed individuals and their families.
This strengthens the argument. If there are no taxes collected, then people will indeed have no financial incentive to accept jobs. Eliminate.
(B) Neighboring countries with laws that mandate the minimum wage an employer must pay an employee have higher unemployment rates than Ledland currently has.
Totally irrelevant here. What neighboring countries’ unemployment rates are is not helpful in understanding how the assistance to reach min wage would be helpful in Ledland. Also the question isn’t covering the amount of the minimum wage but rather how the government can help reach it.
(C) People who are employed and look for a new job tend to get higher-paying jobs than job seekers who are unemployed.
This is a very interesting choice. The argument is about the people not having a financial incentive and our goal is to show that there is one. If people who are currently employed have a better chance at getting higher paying jobs, then unemployed people might have financial incentive in terms of higher future earnings. Bingo.
(D) The yearly amount unemployed people receive from government assistance is less than the yearly income that the government defines as the poverty level.
Irrelevant. Poverty level, whatever it is, is not helpful here.
(E) People sometimes accept jobs that pay relatively little simply because they enjoy the work.
You could make the argument that if people enjoy work, they might be willing to work to earn the same amount of money they would earn sitting at home receiving government assistance, a big stretch in itself. More importantly, the sometimes doesn’t really make a strong argument here for this choice. Eliminate.
C is the correct answer.