Bunuel
Russia's aggressive fishing in the prime fishing grounds of the Northern Pacific has led to a sharp decline in the populations of many fish and a general increase in the retail price of fish. This same pattern has occurred with far too many of our scarce vital natural resources, resulting in high prices for many products. It is likely then, that fish prices will continue to rise in the near future.
In making the argument above, the author relies on all of the following assumptions EXCEPT:
(A) The scarcity of fish is a determining factor in its price
(B) The decline in the number of fish available will result in higher prices for fish in stores.
(C) There will not be any substantial decrease in other costs involved in the fishing process that could keep the price of fish from increasing.
(D) Fish populations will not recover in the near future.
(E) Fishing practices can substantially influence the demand for fish.
Russ agg. fishing = ↓ pop of fish & ↑ Ret fish price. (Same with Vital Nat resources)
↑ Ret fish price in FUTURE.
(A) Must be true, a demand and supply crisis is being stated.
(B) Absolutely true, higher demand and less supply has resulted in higher price.
(C) If other fishing costs / Production costs decreases then final retail price will be less, this option state there will not be any such possibility, hence correct.
(D) If there is abundence of fish, then price will drop, as supply will match demand, this is not happening in this case , hence correct.
(E) This is just a statement, which is unfouunded and doent have any relevance, how can production process have any effect on demand for that product, this can not be true,hence, this has to be the correct Answer.