Question

A major natural grocery chain wants to help address the problem of urban food deserts. It decides to build stores in three of the city's most impoverished neighborhoods. These neighborhoods have not had their own grocery stores in many years, leading residents to live on diets of fast food and convenience foods. The grocery chain feels that building the stores in these neighborhoods will encourage people to eat more healthy foods. Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument?

• A. People in poverty prefer quick, easy food.
• B. The prices at the natural food store are 10-20% higher than the prices at the convenience stores and fast food restaurants.
• C. The grocery store chain will give classes on how to cook with natural foods.
• D. The grocery store chain's other stores are in wealthier neighborhoods.
• E. Most people in the impoverished neighborhoods use food stamps.

Hint:

When analyzing arguments, consider factors like affordability that may affect the success of the proposed solution.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is B

Step 1: Understanding the argument.
The grocery chain assumes that by building stores in impoverished neighborhoods, people will eat healthier foods. However, if the prices at the natural food store are significantly higher, this may discourage people from shopping there.

Step 2: Analyzing the options.
- (A) People in poverty prefer quick, easy food: While this may be true, it does not weaken the argument that people will buy healthier food if the store is available.
- (B) The prices at the natural food store are 10-20% higher than the prices at the convenience stores and fast food restaurants: This weakens the argument because higher prices may prevent people from shopping at the natural food store, making it less likely they will switch to healthier food.
- (C) The grocery store chain will give classes on how to cook with natural foods: This could help encourage healthier eating but does not directly address the core issue of affordability.
- (D) The grocery store chain's other stores are in wealthier neighborhoods: This does not directly weaken the argument about the chain's success in impoverished neighborhoods.
- (E) Most people in the impoverished neighborhoods use food stamps: While this could affect affordability, it does not directly weaken the argument about the availability of healthy food.

Step 3: Conclusion.
Option (B) weakens the argument the most because it highlights a barrier (higher prices) that could prevent people from purchasing healthier food, thus undermining the grocery chain's assumption.