In 1980, 18% of American families lived under the poverty line. In 1990, only 12% of families lived under the poverty line. But that doesn’t mean fewer families were living in poverty. Indeed, the statistics hide the fact that more families were actually living in destitution. The difference in percentages appears because the poverty line was redefined and the income level was reduced. Thus, many families were above the poverty line even though they did not earn any more income. Which of the following statements, if true, would most strengthen this argument?
- This kind of statistical manipulation is appalling.
- A nationwide recession occurred in 1980 and an economic boom occurred in the 1990s.
- Republicans were in power in 1980, whereas Democrats were in power in 1990.
- The poverty line is regularly adjusted (income level raised) to account for inflation.
- The number of welfare recipients in 1990 was 11% higher than in 1980.
Answer(s): D
Explanation:
Including the fact that the poverty line is regularly raised to account for inflation would significantly strengthen the conclusion that more families were living in poverty in 1990 despite the lower percentage of families under the poverty line. Choice a is an opinion that expresses anger at statistical manipulation but does not provide a premise that would further support the conclusion. Choice b offers information that might help account for a normal difference in the number of families living in poverty, but the passage doesn’t argue that fewer families were in poverty in 1990; rather, it argues the opposite. Choice c is essentially irrelevant. Democrats and Republicans may have certain agendas and institute certain social policies, but this is not relevant unless the reader knows a specific Democratic or Republican measure taken to affect the poverty level. Choice e suggests that many more poor people needed assistance in 1990 than 1980, but it is essentially irrelevant without further information showing the correlation between welfare recipients and the poverty line; it may be an apples-to- oranges comparison. You would need to know if any significant changes in welfare policy occurred in the interim.