KANIKABHATEJA
argument says- however, waterfront properties are generally seen as prestigious, as evidenced by the large sums paid for homes along the beach front , doesnt this mean if people are paying large sums of money then they are already in=terested in buying property at waterfront?
Definitely not. There could certainly be lots of other areas where housing is also expensive.
More generally,
"If X, then Y" and "If Y, then X" are two completely different statements. These can be any possible combination of truth values (true and true; true and false; false and true; or false and false).
Here,
X = buy on the waterfront
Y = spend a lot of money for your home
What's novel in choice B is the fact that the waterfront homes are going to be built on former industrial sites. Industrial sites are often rife with contamination, toxic residues, and so on from the industrial processes that were once carried out there, so it's not certain that people would be willing to pay $$$$ for homes on such a site. Choice B removes that uncertainty.
Quote:
whereas option d stregthens that if given tax incentives developers will be benefitted more
Choice D isn't relevant because the argument is about
demand (from homebuyers) for homes, not about supply (from developers).