The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 pe

The unemployment rates in Prelandia fell from 8 to 7 percent in 5 years, but it cannot be properly concluded that the number of people reduced because ______. We need to finish the passage taking into account the information given and find the best logical ending. This is type of CR (Critical Reasoning) questions. Let us analyze each option:

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886 - Even though the time spent by employees in any particular job dropped, it does not give the reason to think that it affected the number of unemployed people somehow. Incorrect
(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886 - This statement supposes that total number of working people increased. In this case, if the workforce increase was significant, the number of unemployed workers could even grow despite the fact that the percentage of unemployed people decreased. Correct
(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881 - The information about other states is irrelevant. Incorrect
(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers - In case high-paying jobs were replaced by low-wage service jobs, most probably people had to work at low-wage jobs, and this statement does not explain how the percentage is irrelevant to the total number of unemployed people. Incorrect
(E) help-wanted advertisements increased between 1881 and 1886 - The number of advertisements does not explain how the number of unemployed workers increased. It could have been increase in work places instead. Incorrect

Answer: B

The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886. It cannot, however, be properly concluded from these statistics that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881 because ________.

Here we need to find the reason why despite the higher rate the number of people who were unemployed was lower.
Notice, that un the first sentence the author uses percentages and in the second he speaks about the number of people.
The first thing that springs in mind is that the population of Prelandia grew. Let's check the answers.

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886 ----it does not explain why number of unemployed people was lower
(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886 ---in line with pre-thinking.
(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881 --- this option talks about some mid-western industrial states, but we consider Prelandia as a whole
(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers ---- This does not affect the unemployent rate
(E) help-wanted advertisements increased between 1881 and 1886 --- this is absolutely out of scope


The answer is B

The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886. It cannot, however, be properly concluded from these statistics that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881 because ________.

Prethinking: Rate fell but number cannot be concluded - as rate is a factor of 2 things "unemployed and total workforce". So total workforce might have increased significantly while unemployed people marginally increased or remained the same.

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886 - Incorrect, as no impact on the rate of unemployment (not considered for arriving at the rate or number of unemployed people)
(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886 - Correct, in like with prethinking.
(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881. We are concerned with unemployment rate and total workforce in entire Prelandia. Intra-country differences will not affect the country's rate or number of workforce
(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers - the jobs were not lost but replaced so has no effect on the rate or total workforce
(E) help-wanted advertisements increased between 1881 and 1886 - Irrelevant, advertisement has no correction with rate or total workforce in the country

The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886. It cannot, however, be properly concluded from these statistics that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881 because ________.

ANALYSIS:
unemployemnt rate fell BUT cannot conclude that number decreased
Because_________
We have to give reason for 1st statement
If population increased and rate decreased, that would explain why we cannot conclude that number decreased

Options prefixed with X are discarded

X(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886
>>Average time per job would neither affect rate of unemployment nor number of people unemployed

(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886
>> THIS IS CORRECT. Since total workforce increased, the reduced 7% of bigger workforce may be higher than 8% of lower workforce. This would satisfactorily complete the sentence after because

X(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881
>>This only speaks abot rates of a component. No information about why numbers maynot be overall lower. High rates in 1 region do not explain uncertaininty in number of unemployed. We already know overall rate has reduced

X(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers
>>Reduction in high paying jobs does not mean reduction in number of unemployed people

X(E) help-wanted advertisements increased between 1881 and 1886
>>increase in job postings does not mean change in number of emplyed people. Mabe number of available jobs increased.


ANSWER: B

1881 – unemployment rate was 8%
1886 - unemployment rate was 7%

Conclusion: the number of unemployed people probably didn’t decrease between 1881 and 1886.
Reason: because_________

Whatever says the author as the reason, this information should clarify why 8% percent of a certain number is not greater than the 7% of another number (of unemployed people). Well, how can that indeed be true? We know that 7% of 200 is greater than the 8% of 100. We should probably look for a similar scenario in the answer choices.

A. The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886

This answer choice simply says that during this period people began to switch their jobs more frequently. For example, if before an average worker stayed in his job for 5 years, later this period declined to 2-3 years. However, that piece information doesn’t necessarily mean that he was jobless after 2-3 years, but may mean that he found a new more perspective job. Thus the frequency with which jobs were switched doesn’t enable to figure out the number of jobless people.

C. In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881

What does some mean? Some may mean only 2 or 3 states. If unemployment rate was much higher in only in 2 states, and in all the other states this rate was much lower than before or even zero, then the author might be wrong when he uses C as a reason. The decrease in other states may very well outnumber the increase of the unemployed people in those some states.

D. Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers.

The same situation as in A. Not the quantity but the quality of the employment is changing. D uses the word replaced. Replaced in turn means that jobs were not lost, but simply other people who work for less money came to the place of people who used to receive higher wages. Displacement doesn’t mean that jobs were lost, but means that workers had to find other jobs. If still not convinced that D is a wrong reason, then just pay attention that D talks only about high-paying industrial jobs, not about all kinds of jobs.

E. help-wanted advertisements increased between 1881 and 1886

The most uncertain answer of all. Does such advertisement increased because unemployment increased? Maybe development in printing or radio or whatever mean of media was the reason? What if just the circulation of the magazines and journals with such advertisement increased? E can’t help the author to explain his conclusion.

B. The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886

The most awaited and needed reason is the increase in the number of workforce! As we have already said 7% of 200 is greater than the 8% of 100. B intentionally says that both employed and unemployed workforce increased. If only employed workforce had increased, then the number of unemployed people would not increase. Therefore, we want the number of unemployed workforce also to increase so that the author could explain why he can’t conclude that the unemployment decreased in 1886.

Hence B

Let's break down the argument first. We know that unemployment rate was 8 percent in 1881. In 1886, unemployment already dropped to 7 percent. But, the argument warns, we should not conclude that number of unemployed dropped. At this point we need to find a reason why even tough percentage of unemployed dropped, number of people with no job did not. B does a great job here at explaining why. Let's set an example to illustrate.
Say in 1881, there were 100 people in workforce, consequently 8 people had no job.
Already in 1886, there were 1000 people in labor, and those without job were 70 or 7 percent.
As we see, even if percentage is lower, real number can be bigger. B says the same, more people were in workforce (and without job too, which directly draws needed conclusion).
Although we already found best choice, let's still look into other ones and prove them wrong

A. The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886 - If in 1886, a worker worked in one job for 10 years, in 1886 the figure declined to 7 years. But even if employee switched jobs more frequently, we are not given information about employment situation. This option just says that people got hired, quit jobs, got hired,........ more frequently that is it.

C. In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881 - key word here is "some". Some states can mean just five out of many. Even if unemployment there was higher, majority of other states cases can substantially change statistics, thus we are not concerned with '"some"

D. Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers. - Does not provide information about size of employment. This option just says that quality of workers changed. Before the country had more skilled jobs, now they are replaced with low-skilled jobs. But we do not care for this information.

E. help-wanted advertisements increased between 1881 and 1886 - we need lots of assumption for this one. It may be either that work force increased or that more people quit their jobs and thus firms search for new ones or that press became affordable and thus employees search for workers not through word of mouth but printed press or radio (if it was already developed by that time)

Now, we are certain to mark B as answer. Not only we found one correct answer but also four incorrect.

We know that the unemployment rate fell from 8 to 7 percent
if the number of population in 1981 was x, then the unemployed people is 0.08x
if the number of population in 1986 was y, then the unemployed people is 0.07y

Truly it depends on x and y which value above is more or even equal

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886
The average time employers stay on their jobs is quite irrelevant to find the reason why statistical data above is not enough to conclude what we are trying to conclude

(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886
I bet on this.
We know that the population increased (and does not remain the same) but we don't have the numbers
x=1000, unemployed people=0.08x=80
y=1100, unemployed people=0.07y=77 reduced
y=1200, unemployed people=0.07y=84 increased
That's why the author says that it cannot be properly concluded whether unemployed people increased, decreased or stayed the same

(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881
Thank you very much for providing some info about other states, but we dont care about it at this moment

(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers
Tells us about one aspect of the industry, but does not explain why we cant conclude increase/decrease of the number of unemployed people

(E) help-wanted advertisements increased between 1881 and 1886
help-wanted advertisements does not have a good correlation with unemployment rate or number, it's just a matter of habit: in 1981 most unemployed used such advertisements or only some

IMO
Ans: B

IMO-B


Passage-
In Prelandia
Unemployment rate fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886.

Question concerned about comparison between the number of unemployed people in the two stated years.

Prethinking:
E- Employed Workforce
U- Unemployed Workforce
U+E- Total workforce

Unemployment rate= [ U / (U+E) ] *100

U= % Unemployment x (U+E)

Fall in unemployment rate can be because of U (Umemployed Workforce decrease) or U+E- (total Workforce increase) or combination of the two.


(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886[b]--- Incorrect---[/b] This option tells about avg . stay in any job.. but no information about workforce. So this doesnt help ascertain anything about the unemployed.

(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886-- Correct------ If total workforce increased (U+E) between 1881 to 1886, then U+E(1881) < U+E(1886)

Now, U= % Unemployment x (U+E),
U (1881)= .08 (U+E- of 1881).......[(U+E- of 1881)- less compared to (U+E- of 1886)]
U(1886)=.07(U+E- of 1886)
We may not be able conclude from this , as Unemployed may be more or less in 1886 compared to 1881

(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881------ Incorrect----- We have to conclude on unemployed workforce that too in Prelandia. Mid-western industrial states are irrelevalent to discussion.

(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers------ Incorrect-----Incorrect----A/C this U+E(1881) > U+E(1886)
Therefore, .08 * U+E(1881) > 0.7* U+E(1886)
U(1881)>U(1886)
In this option, we are able to conclude. so this option wrong in accordance to question.

(E) help-wanted advertisements increased between 1881 and 1886------ Incorrect----- Advertisment increased but the effect of that on employment not known.

The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886. It cannot, however, be properly concluded from these statistics that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881 because ________.

The percentage of unemployment rate in 1886 is lower than that of 1881. From this we cannot conclude that the absolute number of unemployed was less in 1886 than that of 1881. The reason for this is the population comprising of both employed and unemployed could very well increase substantially over a period of 5-6 years and the absolute number of unemployed could be more even though the percentage is less.
Example: Year-1881: Population-100: unemployment rate-8%: #unemployed-8
Year-1886: Population-200: unemployment rate-7%: #unemployed-14
So, even though rate decreased, absolute value increased.

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886 --> average time of a employee staying in one job dropped doesn't mean the employee got unemployed. It simply means that the employee keeps switching jobs at a faster rate than earlier. This option doesn't give us any idea whether the employment got increased or decreased in any manner. Incorrect.
(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886 --> This statement states that the population increased and this is very well in lines of earlier thought process. Correct.
(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881 --> Statement is talking about Prelandia and not about mid-western industrial states. Out of Scope. Incorrect.
(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers --> Job type got changed and leading to displacement doesn't provide us with any data about increase or decrease in unemployment. Infact displacement will just lead to a person working from one job to another. Incorrect.
(E) help-wanted advertisements increased between 1881 and 1886 --> increase in advertisements doesn't mean that people actually applied for the employment and got one. Even if it has to be true, then another assumption of population remaining constant is required. Incorrect.

Answer Choice: B

The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886. It cannot, however, be properly concluded from these statistics that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881 because ________.

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886
If this is true, then the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia would most likely to increase. However, this information does not help to explain why we cannot confidently conclude that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was either lower or higher than it had been in 1881. It also fails to explain the lower unemployment rate in 1886 Prelandia.

(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886
CORRECT ANSWER. This fact most helps to explain why the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was not necessarily lower than it had been in 1881 despite lower unemployment rate in 1886 Prelandia. Consider two following cases:
#01- The total available work force increased from 70,000 in 1881 to 100,000 in 1886. Even if the unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886, the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia (= 7,000) would still be higher to it had been in 1881 (= 5,600).
#02- The total available work force increased from 70,000 in 1881 to 77,000 in 1886. If the unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886, then the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia (= 5,390) would be indeed lower to it had been in 1881 (= 5,600).

(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881
This information is not useful to explain why we cannot confidently conclude that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881. If this choice is true, much higher unemployment rate in other mid-western states and lower unemployment rate in Prelandia may indicate that Prelandia economy actually did very well from 1881 to 1886. We, therefore, can confidently expect much lower number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia than it had been in 1881.

(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers
This information doesn't help much to explain why we cannot confidently conclude that the number of unemployed in 1886 Prelandia was either lower or higher than it had been in 1881. It also fails to explain the lower unemployment rate in 1886 Prelandia. If more than hundreds of thousands of high-paying industrial jobs were replaced by low-wage service jobs, then it is clear sign that Prelandia economy fell badly from 1881 to 1886 and, inevitably, the Prelandia's unemployment numbers in 1886 would most likely to rise.

(E) help-wanted advertisements increased between 1881 and 1886
This information doesn't help to explain why we cannot confidently conclude that the number of unemployed in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881. The increased number of help-wanted ads from 1881 to 1886 obviously indicates more employment opportunities during that period and thus, it makes sense that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia would definitely go lower than it had been in 1881.

Answer is (B)

Unemployment rate fell from 8% to 7%. however, we cannot conclude that more people were unemployed(not working) than were employed. answer choice below should show how the number of unemployed people in 1886 >= number of unemployed people in 1881..

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886
Average time one spent on one Job has dropped. It could be mean people are switching more often or it could mean they may be working long hours before and now reduced the no of hours. it could also mean people stopped working in between. however, it does not conclusively suggest reasoning to impact the conclusion.

(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886
this option suggests total available workforce, meaning the number of people available to work (including employed and unemployed ) increased. Let's say available workforce was 100 in 1881, and unemployment rate 8% i.e 8 people were unemployed. and total available workforce in 1886 was 300. 7% of 200 = 14 . this proves why we cannot conclude above. keep the answer

(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881
comparison with other states will not help compare the unemployment discussion in the two years of current state.

(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers
many high paying jobs were replaced by low-wage service jobs. this resulted in displacement of many workers. displacement could mean removed from the jobs or relocated/moved from the current job. this also suggests if some people lost jobs , some gained jobs. it does not conclusively impact the conclusion

(E) help-wanted advertisements increased between 1881 and 1886
many jobs are available. availability of job does not indicate impact to people being employed or not employed. many jobs could not be fulfilled due to skills not matching and unemployment rate would still be high.

B is the sufficient answer

The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886. It cannot, however, be properly concluded from these statistics that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881 because ________.

Understanding of Argument :
There was 8% unemployment rate in 1881 which became 7% in 1886
So it dropped as percentage by 1%.
Argument concludes that still the number of unemployed are not lower than numbers of unemployed in 1881

Our Goal is to strengthen this conclusion with as reasoning- it is strengthen type of question so some new information will help to fill the gap.

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886
-Average time to stay in one job does not help to strengthen conclusion since argument is talking about unemployment rate and not average time that employee stays in the job. Till the time they are employed it does not affect the argument .
Average time to stay in job is IRRELEVANT. So eliminate A


(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886
- Correct. This helps to strengthen our conclusion that even after 1% drop in unemployment rate in 1886 ,why actual number of unemployed are not less than 1881 in 1886. If for eg there was total work force of 100 in 1881 and unemployment rate was 8% so 8 ppl were unemployed. Statement B says that total available work force has increased between 1881 and 1886 so lets say it became 200 in 1886 and unemployment rate is 7%. So now actual number of unemployed are 14. So number is greater than 1881 even after drop in unemployment rate.


(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881
- This option is talking about "some states" having higher unemployment rate. But based on this information we cannot conclude anything strongly in support of conclusion that why number of unemployed were actually not lower in 1881.Overall unemployment rate was lower in 1886 so may be some other states had much lower unemployment rate in 1886 than it had been in 1881 and so overall average was lower in 1886 .
So eliminate C

(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers
- There was change in industrial jobs which resulted in displacement (change in position) of hundreds of workers but it does not say they became unemployed. Probably they were moved from high paying jobs but were still employed so it does not explain why the actual unemployment was not lower in 1881. So we Eliminate D

(E) help-wanted advertisements increased between 1881 and 1886
- If help -wanted ad increased between 1881 to 1886 ,that indicates actually more jobs availability .If more jobs requirements were created in 1886 how can the number of unemployed be lower than 1881. This is reverse statement and weakens the conclusion. so Eliminate E



ANS IS CHOICE B

Dream it! Achieve it!

The unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886. It cannot, however, be properly concluded from these statistics that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881 because ________.

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886 - Duration doesn't tell us anything about what happens after the drop - the employess could had found another jor or stayed unemployed, out

(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886
This is best, among others, explanation: if a base increases, drop in rate might not offset marginal increase of one parts of the base. However, it still has weak points: we do not know how much shares of the unemployment base changed

(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881
Doesn't provide explanation as we are interested in situation throghout the country, out

(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers
Irrelevant because it cannot explain why rate fell but absolute number might not, out

(E) help-wanted advertisements increased between 1881 and 1886
Advertisements show increase in supply of job, but tell nothing about # of unemployed, out

Answer is B

Premise: Unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886
Conclusion: It cannot, however, be properly concluded from these statistics that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881
Question: Why???


(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886
In this situation, employees would not be considered unemployed if they change jobs

(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886
This is the answer
8% Of say 100 = 8 are unemployed
available workforce increased to 1000
7% of 1000 = 70

Thus it cannot be properly concluded from these statistics that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower

(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881
When talking about a country as a whole, there would definitely be areas with different rates, but would average out

(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers
High paying or low wage service jobs would not make a difference in unemployment numbers, displacement if it happened around the same country , would not make a difference,

(E) help-wanted advertisements increased between 1881 and 1886
help wanted advertisements would not necessarily mean there would be no unemployment... skill gap could be an issue

this question is based on common misconception
---Decreasing percentage leads to decreasing number

suppose total worforce, including those with and without employment,in 1881 = 100
unemployment rate = 8% of 100 ---8 persons are unemployed

total worforce, including those with and without employment,in 1886 = 1000
unemployment rate = 7% of 1000---70 persons are unemployed

so decrease in percentage doesn't lead to a decreasing number
that's why we cant conclude safely from the given statistics

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886
we are concerned about providing the reason why we cant conclude from the decrease in the unemployment rate that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881 ..... how much time employee spend in the job doesn't provide reason SO (OUT)

(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886
yes this is the correct answer for the reason discussed above (CORRECT)

(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881
WE are not concerned about unemployment of other states .....comparing unemployment rate from other state doesn't provide a reason why the given statistics is not the true indicator that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881 (OUT)

(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers
high paying jobs are replaced by low paying jobs this doesn't lead to loss of job maybe people are still emplyoed in low paying job....this answer choice is irrelevant to our concern it doesnt provide reason why we cant conclude from given statistics that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881 (IRRELEVANT)


(E) help-wanted advertisements increased between 1881 and 1886
this answer choice doesnt provide reason why the given statistics is not the true indicator that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881 (OUT)

We need to find the answer choice that strengthens the conclusion.

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886 - we are not bothered about how long an employee stays with any job. It could well be the case that these people moved to other jobs.

(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886 - If the number of persons increased between 1881 and 1886, it could well be that the number of unemployed persons went up. For example, say the no. of persons in the workforce during 1881 and 1886 were 80 and 100 respectively. So no. of unemployed persons in 1881 and 1886 would be 64 and 70 respectively. Hence, this option is correct.

(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881 - Even if some states had higher unemployment rate, the unemployment rate of Prelandia as a whole was lower. So, this doesn't help the conclusion.

(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers - This doesn't state how the no. of unemployed people could have gone up as the people with higher wages could have switched to lower wages (but still they were employed).

(E) help-wanted advertisements increased between 1881 and 1886 - We are not given any info about whether such advertisements caused a decline in unemployment.

he unemployment rate in Prelandia fell from 8 percent in 1881 to 7 percent in 1886. It cannot, however, be properly concluded from these statistics that the number of unemployed people in 1886 Prelandia was lower than it had been in 1881 because ________.
Conclusion:

Even when the statistics shows that the employment rate has decreased, it cannot be concluded that total unemployed population has gone down. We need something that will explain this paradox

(A) The average time that employees stay in any one job dropped during the period 1881 to 1886- Incorrect. They may be not staying in one job but might be be shifting jobs hastily. this does not affect the unemployment rate, even if we assume that they leave work completely and stay unemployed, the percentage must have gone up
(B) The total available work force, including those with and without employment, increased between 1881 and 1886- Correct. If the total work force(employed + employed has gone up), then even if the rate has gone down, The number of people can be same or lower. Hence the statistics could be wrong
(C) In some mid-western industrial states, the unemployment rate was much higher in 1886 than it had been in 1881- Out of scope.We are not concerned about other states
(D) Many of the high-paying industrial jobs available in 1881 were replaced by low-wage service jobs in 1886, resulting in displacement of hundreds of thousands of workers-Incorrect . If this was the case, it could have been reflected in the percentages above
(E) help-wanted advertisements increased between 1881 and 1886- Irrelevant. Increase in just advertisements doesn't necessarily they have all been posted by unemployed people and their corresponding number has also increased.