Priyadarshana wrote:
Adi93 wrote:
Economist: Every business strives to increase its productivity, for this increases profits for the owners and the likelihood that the business will survive. But not all efforts to increase productivity are beneficial to the business as a whole. Often, attempts to increase productivity decrease the number of employees, which clearly harms the dismissed employees as well as the sense of security of the retained employees.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the economist’s argument?
(A) If an action taken to secure the survival of a business fails to enhance the welfare of the business’s employees, that action cannot be good for the business as a whole.-- a bit specific
Can we eliminate A because the argument talks about increasing productivity and the option talks about survival of business? I wanted to confirm if my thought process is correct.
You're on the right track, but the key is to stay focused on the exact language in the question itself. We can eliminate (A) because the economist's
main conclusion is not focused on whether employee welfare is being enhanced. The economist's main conclusion is about the impact of measures taken to enhance productivity. Reduction of employee welfare is just one (of many) forms of impact mentioned by the economist. And the further you go into choice (A), the less this choice reflects the author's overall consideration of beneficial and harmful impact.
I hope this helps!