bholakc
When news periodicals begin forecasting a recession, people tend to spend less money on discretionary purchases. Therefore, the perceived threat of recession decreases the willingness of people to purchase products that they regard as optional or luxury goods.
The argument above assumes that _
(A) there are more luxury goods available after a recession is forecast
(B) recently, the threat of recession has been increasingly publicized as news periodicals have grown more pervasive
(C) most people do not regularly read news periodicals
(D) people's perception of the threat of recession increases when news periodicals begin forecasting a recession
(E) the people who spent the most money before a recession was forecast were among those who curtailed their spending after the recession became apparent
A. There could be more luxury goods available after a forecast because people are not spending on them. But it doesnt link how periodicals affect the result
B. When news periodicals have gone pervasive it is possible that they can affect public opinion and when they write about recession it is taken as true and people behave accordingly. But why recently? This cast a doubt, if it could be an assumption
c. Not at all, if people dont read them, then how can they affect public opinion and hence the conclusion which followed.
D. This can be true, it is assuming importance of news periodicals and their affect on perception
E. This cant be true because it doesnt give any importance to periodicals to change perception.
My choice is D.
But I am still not sure why cant it be B, even though, I have given my own explanation for it. Pls give more clarification