In some countries, there is

Answer choices

1. A

   Out of Scope: Suffer1% picked this

   It is more likely that people without political power will suffer from economic crises than it is that

   We're not receptive to new language on Sufficient Assumption. We're trying to patch together the ideas that were already mentioned.

   1%
2. B

   Correct81% picked this

   Economic crises become more frequent as the amount of information available to the population about factors

   Why this is right

   We were looking to get from "if vast majority is denied vital info about factors that determine their welfare" to "more likely to experience frequent economic crises" This answer is saying, the less info there is available to the population about factors determining its welfare, the more frequent there will be economic crises. This rule allows us to prove that tightly controlled countries, where only a small elite has access to info and 99% of the population is denied vital info about factors that affect its welfare, are more likely to have economic crises.

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

   81%
3. C

   No Impact: Relative vs. Absolute15% picked this

   In nations in which the government controls access to information about infrastructure, agriculture, and industry,

   The argument is about whether economic crises are more common in tightly controlled countries. Whether or not they are common is neutral to the argument. Economic crises might also be common in free flowing information countries. Since the conclusion only cares about relative status (more/same/less common), we get no value out of absolute status (common / not common).

   15%
4. D

   Out of Scope: Better Decisions1% picked this

   The higher the percentage of the population that participates in economic decisions, the better

   The term "better decisions" is new, which on Sufficient Assumption is almost always out of scope / wrong. However, on a Strengthen question, this would certainly strengthen. We would think that free flowing information countries make better economic decisions, since they have a higher % of population participating in economic decisions (since in tightly controlled societies, vast majority are denied info about economy). But that's not a given. We're just adding our own reasonable assumptions, which is legal in the headspace of Strengthen / Weaken. Sufficient Assumption, meanwhile, needs an airtight circuit, where A attaches to B, B attaches to C. If we bring in new ideas like "better decisions", then we would need a connecting idea to relate it to the conversation (like "better economic decisions make you less likely to experience frequent economic crises"). The correct answer on Sufficient Assumption has to close the circuit. It can't create new loose ends.

   1%
5. E

   Out of Scope: Manipulate For Benefit2% picked this

   A small elite that controls information about infrastructure, agriculture, and industry is likely to manipulate that information

   Because this answer introduces new wording, you would still need an additional idea to prove the argument (when economic information is manipulated for the elite's own benefit, a country is more likely to experience an economic crisis).

   2%