nks2611
confused btw B&E ,can someone explain why we should not go with E although it looks peachy but still unable to eliminate it , please shed your light on it
Break the argument down -
some of the income used for housing and entertainment costs by single professionals can be used by married professionals for other purchases. --> Married professionals have more money to spend on discretionary purchasesWhat does this imply? Probably that they do not incur housing and entertainment costs. (why else will they have this advantage?)
We have to look for an answer that suggests this. Option B does this perfectly.
Option E - Incorrect.
"Housing and entertainment costs account for the largest proportion of a single professional’s expenditures." - Even if it does not account for the largest proportion (let's say it does not account for 60%, but only 30%), married professionals
still do have more money to spend on discretionary purchases.
Hence, it is not required for those costs to be the "largest" proportion of expenditures.
Option A - Incorrect.
"Married professionals have more money to spend on discretionary purchases" - does not mean that they WILL spend more money on those purchases.
Option C - Incorrect.
We cannot infer anything about this group - "Couples that live together but are not married".
Option D - Incorrect.
We cannot infer anything about "incomes".
I have a problem with this question ! How can we infer that the housing costs are less than what singles incur. Perhaps it could be same. And they could have more money to spare because both the partners are earning .
The only thing we can infer is that two people living together will have lesser costs .
Please clarify this.