Economist: The increase in the minimum wage in Country X will quickly lead to a decrease in Country X's rate of unemp...

jingjingxiao11111@gmail.com on November 20, 2021

I am not an instructor. I believe C) is too weak/general a statement to weaken the argument. Had C) used stronger quantifiers, namely “In all factories, all workers are paid much more than the current minimum wage”, it would weaken the argument by stating that more disposable income for a large segment of the working population is achieved by raising the current minimum wage. Having just a couple of factories (many factories) where most workers are paid much more than the current minimum wage cannot prove that more disposable income is achieved for a large segment of the working population. What if the majority of factories (most other factories) pay their workers just minimum wage? In my opinion, quantifiers in C) are not strong enough and that is why C) cannot weaken.

A) Weakens the argument by contending that the increase in minimum wage will make consumer goods more expensive. Thus the increase in minimum wage will not lead to decrease in country’s rate of employment as the argument argues that it is the demand for consumer goods that will lead to an increase in the number of factory jobs necessary to meet production. If the consumer goods become more expensive, the consumer demands will likely go down because people cannot afford them, thus not leading to an increase in the number of factory jobs.
B) Weakens the argument by contending that the increase in factory jobs as a result of more consumer demands will not take place in country x as the consumer goods are foreign-produced.
D) Weakens the argument by contending that the increase in minimum wage will lead to a reduction in the workforce to offset the employer’s cost thus not leading to a decrease in unemployment rate.
E) Weakens the argument by stating that consumer demands will not increase to the point of needing more consumer goods being produced because previously most factories have always had large leftover goods as a result of yearly overproduction.

Thank you. Please correct me if I am wrong.

jingjingxiao11111@gmail.com on November 20, 2021

Important correction to the last post: Had C) used stronger quantifiers, namely “In all factories, all workers are paid much more than the current minimum wage”, it would weaken the argument by stating that more disposable income for a large segment of the working population is NOT achieved by raising the current minimum wage.

I did not put "NOT" in my original statement. Sorry for the mistake. Thank you!

Ravi on February 13, 2022

A weakens the argument because if goods are more expensive than they were before, then the people in Country X will not have more disposable income to demand more consumer goods, and more factory jobs won't be created.

B weakens the argument because if most goods aren't being made in the factories of Country X, then there isn't any reason why an increased demand for consumer goods in Country X would result in more factory jobs in the country.

D weakens the argument because it makes the conclusion less likely to be true. If an increase in the minimum wage results in people getting laid off, then the people who are laid off will not have more disposable income. "Reductions in the workforce" will almost certainly lead to a higher unemployment rate.

E weakens the argument because if these factories have large surpluses of goods, then they will be able to sell their surpluses rather than hire new employees to produce more goods.