Consumers will be hurt by the new

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct62% picked this

   The demand for halibut will not decrease substantially after the new

   Why this is right

   This strengthens mildly, because it is a Necessary Assumption, and necessary assumptions do strengthen somewhat. We can feel the Necessary Assumption vibe whenever we see that whole "ruling out an objection" language like "not / no". If we negated this, it would be saying that, "After the new restrictions are imposed, the demand for halibut will decrease substantially". We know that price goes down whenever supply goes up or demand goes down, so if demand were to decrease substantially that would potentially lower the price of halibut. Since the negation would badly weaken (if not contradict) the conclusion, this answer as written is a necessary assumption and thus it's mildly strengthening the author's claim by ruling out a big objection.

   Skill tested: Strengthen · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   62%
2. B

   Unclear Impact17% picked this

   There is a connection between the supply of halibut and the

   The author doesn't need to assume any connection between supply and demand. My demand for watermelon is constant. All year long I want watermelon, but the supply of watermelon is highly variable. So it's not like in the real world we assume that supply and demand are connected. The question stem is saying, "Sure, but if they are connected, does that strengthen?" No, because I don't know what kind of connection it is --- is it proportional kind of connection or an inversely proportional kind of connection? Are we saying that as supply shrinks, demand shrinks or are we saying as supply shrinks, demand increases? Those two would have opposite effects on the argument, so because we don't know the nature of "the connection" this answer is describing, it has unclear impact.

   17%
3. C

   Unclear Impact: other fish18% picked this

   The lost production of halibut will not be replaced by increased production

   We're just trying to assess whether the price of halibut will rise. We don't care whether production of other fish goes up. If we knew that people would happily buy this other fish rather than halibut, that could weaken the author's claim. The author is assuming that demand for halibut stays the same while supply shrinks (from these new lower ceilings), thus causing price of halibut to rise. The increased fishing of other fish might have some effect on the demand for halibut, but we're really speculating. Compared to (A), this answer does not give us as clear a sense of how increased production of other fish would affect demand for halibut, whereas (A) just speaks directly about demand for halibut.

   18%
4. D

   Out of Scope3% picked this

   The demand for other fish will be affected by the

   Out of Scope: demand for other fish We only care about the price of halibut, so we only care about how the supply of halibut or the demand for halibut is changing. This answer is talking about the demand for other fish, which does not directly affect demand for halibut (at least not in any way we were told or in any obvious common sense way).

   3%
5. E

   Irrelevant Comparison1% picked this

   The amount of halibut consumed represents a very small proportion of

   It doesn't interest us what % of the total fish market halibut is. Whatever that % is, we just want to know whether supply or demand will change now that these new lower ceiling on halibut catches are imposed. This answer doesn't speak to supply of or demand for halibut.

   1%