President: Population growth in our country is causing

Question

President: Population growth in our country is causing a housing crisis because resources for creating housing at the rate necessary for keeping up with population growth are in short supply. So, to make housing affordable for our citizens, we must find a way to reduce the rate of population growth by at least 30 percent.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the case for the president’s conclusion?

(A) If the country’s population were to stop growing, it would take several years for the supply of housing to become sufficient for the housing crisis to be solved.

(B) Some studies have shown that, if the country’s rate of population growth were 20 percent lower, the rate of growth in the supply of housing might exceed the population growth rate.

(C) When the housing crisis began, the country’s rate of population growth was lower than it is currently.

(D) Even with a greater supply of resources, it may not be possible to create new housing fast enough to keep up with the country's population growth at its current rate.

(E) There are factors other than population growth that are having an upward effect on housing prices in the country.

Source:  Marty Murray Coaching

MartyMurray · Accepted Answer

President: Population growth in our country is causing a housing crisis because resources for creating housing at the rate necessary for keeping up with population growth are in short supply. So, to make housing affordable for our citizens, we must find a way to reduce the rate of population growth by at least 30 percent.

The conclusion of the argument is the following:

to make housing affordable for our citizens, we must find a way to reduce the rate of population growth by at least 30 percent

The support for the conclusion is the following:

Population growth in our country is causing a housing crisis because resources for creating housing at the rate necessary for keeping up with population growth are in short supply.

We see that the reasoning is basically that, since there aren't sufficient resources for creating housing at the rate necessary for keeping up with population growth, reducing the rate of population growth by at least 30 percent is  necessary  for making housing affordable.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the case for the president’s conclusion?

This is a Weaken question, and the correct answer will cast doubt on the conclusion.

Specifically, the correct answer will show that, even though the premise is true, reducing population growth by at least 30 percent may not be necessary for making housing affordable.

(A) If the country’s population were to stop growing, it would take several years for the supply of housing to become sufficient for the housing crisis to be solved.

The conclusion of the argument is not that reducing population growth will quickly solve the housing crisis. Rather, the conclusion is basically that reducing population growth is necessary for solving the housing crisis.

So, this choice does not cast doubt on the conclusion. After all, even if it would take several years for the crisis to be solved, reducing population growth may still be necessary for solving it.

Eliminate.

(B) Some studies have shown that, if the country’s rate of population growth were 20 percent lower, the rate of growth in the supply of housing might exceed the population growth rate.

This choice is interesting.

After all, if this choice is true, then it may not be true that reducing the rate of population growth by at least 30 percent is necessary for making housing affordable.

After all, if this choice is true, then what the studies have shown indicates that reducing the rate of population growth by 20 percent may be sufficient for making housing affordable.

In that case, while reducing the rate of population growth somewhat may be necessary, reducing it by "at least 30 percent" may not be.

So, this choice casts doubt on the conclusion.

Keep.

(C) When the housing crisis began, the country’s rate of population growth was lower than it is currently.

If anything, this choice in a way strengthens, rather than weakens, the argument.

After all, if population growth is causing the housing crisis and, when the crisis began, the country’s rate of population growth was lower than it is currently, then it seems likely that reducing population growth substantially, to below its level when the crisis began, is necessary for making housing affordable.

Eliminate.

(D) Even with a greater supply of resources, it may not be possible to create new housing fast enough to keep up with the country's population growth at its current rate.

If anything, this choice in a way strengthens, rather than weakens, the argument.

After all, if this choice is true, then we have some confirmation that reducing the rate of population growth is necessary for making housing affordable. After all, this choice indicates that, even if another factor involved in the crisis, limited supply of resources, is addressed, the crisis may continue.

Eliminate.

(E) There are factors other than population growth that are having an upward effect on housing prices in the country.

We have to be careful not to choose this choice just because it brings up other causes of high housing prices. A choice that brings up alternative causes may not be correct, and this choice is not the correct answer to this question.

After all, even if other factors are having an upward effect on housing prices, the president has stated as fact that population growth is causing a housing crisis because resources for creating housing at the rate necessary for keeping up with population growth are in short supply.

So, even if this choice is true, it could still be the case that finding a way to reduce the rate of population growth by at least 30 percent is necessary for making housing affordable.

In other words, the president hasn't said that reducing the rate of population growth is  sufficient  for making housing affordable. The president has said that it's  necessary , and it could be necessary even if other factors are having an upward effect on housing prices as well.

Eliminate.

Correct answer:  B

ritw_k · Answer

After reading your explanation I understood why B is a weakener but I still could not understand why E is not a weakener.

If there are other factors causing high housing prices, reducing the rate of population alone may not fix the issue hence weakening the conclusion.

Please let me know if there are any gaps in my logic. Thanks in advance

MartyMurray · Answer

Take another look at the passage.

Is the conclusion that reducing the rate of population growth alone will serve to address the issue?

ritw_k · Answer

Ahh! I see it now. Let's say all the other factors were indeed responsible for the high housing prices. It's still possible to fix the housing problem by reducing the rate of population growth, regardless of what the other causes were — and option E doesn't address that.

MartyMurray · Answer

I think you may get it now, but I'm not 100 percent sure you have identified the conclusion exactly yet.

wArrior902 · Answer

I eliminated A, C and E. The argument says that high population growth rate (PG) is causing resource scarcity (RS) (because the it's not increasing as per our need, i.e. PG is causing RS). And D says, even if we have greater resources, we might not be able to solve the issue. Then it weakens the fact that population growth (which in turn causes the resource scarcity) is not the real issue, it's something else. So reducing population growth is not necessary condition to make housing affordable?

Is it the case that we can't take causal relationship. Is it about two different things - demand is increasing at higher rate then supply is, and not that supply seems inadequate because of more demand?

And I eliminated B considering even if it's exceeding the rate of PG, it might not enough. But I get it now, we don't need to destroy the argument, and just some doubt is fine to make it a correct answer.

MartyMurray · Answer

To see why (D) doesn't work, let's first review the conclusion of the argument:

So, to make housing affordable for our citizens, we must find a way to reduce the rate of population growth by at least 30 percent.

We see that the point of the conclusion is that reducing the rate of population growth by at least 30 percent is NECESSARY for making housing affordable.

Now, let's consider (D).

(D) Even with a greater supply of resources, it may not be possible to create new housing fast enough to keep up with the country's population growth at its current rate.

Notice that the main thing (D) is indicating is that, even if resources were in greater supply, population growth might still exceed the pace of housing creation and continue to cause a housing crisis.

So, in a way, (D) STRENGTHENS the argument by indicating that reducing population growth might be necessary for making housing affordable even if another factor, supply of resources, were to change.

Thus, (D) does basically the opposite of what the correct answer to this Weaken question must do.

President: Population growth in our country is causing

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

President: Population growth in our country is causing

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards