RRE Question -- Messy LSAC ACs and which one is best

NotMyName

https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-17-section-2-question-14/

I answered this question correctly under timed conditions but switched my answer during BR. Then I noticed lots of others experienced the same difficulty. Neither AC, B nor C, seems better than the other. JY describes B by saying that it independently explains each phenomena in the stimulus but doesn't resolve the tension between the two. I agree that B doesn't resolve the tension without the help of assumptions, but I don't think the assumptions required for B to be correct are any more egregious than that of C.

Here are my BR notes. There are two sets, one for B as the correct AC and one for C.

C correct
"B: I can see why this AC may be tempting to some people. It's by no mistake that it is placed just before (what I believe in BR) is the correct answer. This is tempting because it says demand increased. That part is pretty relevant to the stimulus, but it doesn't resolve the paradox because it doesn't address how the industry could meet this higher demand with 15% less workforce. Eliminate.

C: I breezed passed this the first time, but it does seem to do the best job of explaining this paradox. The stimulus says that Ravonia laid off jobs in logging and WOOD PROCESSING. So why is the amount of wood being taken at Ravonia increasing? Because their not playing around with processing -- just cut it and ship it raw. This isn't a great AC because we need to assume that the increase in exports is enough to drive the 10% increase in wood harvesting mentioned in the stimulus. We also need to assume that there are enough loggers to supply this 10% increase. Least bad AC. Correct POE."

B correct
"B: Oh man. This is definitely right but I totally missed it and nearly missed it under BR. The acres are lower, so they need fewer workers. The demand is up, so they're cutting more trees. Correct.

C: I was pretty sure this AC was correct until I started analyzing it in BR. "A growing number" could mean anything. Maybe the amount of unprocessed wood only increased by 1 tree per year. In fact, this says "proportion" which could mean that the total number has remained constant. I latched onto it because I didn't catch the "proportion" error I was making and felt that the reduction in wood processors explained why raw wood exports were increasing. Eliminate."

Cant Get Right

With your justification of B, you've created a new paradox. We're cutting more trees, so we need fewer workers? Does that sound right? The underlying mistake is in assuming that the amount of land being harvested is a more determinant influence on labor needs than the actual amount of work being done. I've known employers who've tried to justify things like this, haha, and it never works.

The reason C remains correct is that we don't actually need to assume any of those things cited as making C problematic. Our AC doesn't have to fully account for everything, just offer a feasible explanation.

Also, if you've been working PT 17, I'm just going to leave this here. . .
https://7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/10814/oldies-but-goodies-with-sage-josh-pt-17-monday-april-10-7pm-est

NotMyName

@"Cant Get Right" Thanks for jumping in here! Yeah I see what you mean with regards to B. Your comparison of "land being harvested" vs "workers harvesting" definitely makes sense and it helped me see how this really doesn't help to resolve. In fact, I can see how ownership would love this paradox to occur haha "Let's just lay-off 15% of the work force and encourage the remaining 85% to work much, much harder".

B also seems to mirror the stimulus in a way that, as you say, creates it's own paradox. The stimulus says "Less workers and more wood harvested" and B says "Less land and more demand". So a land reduction (scarcity) leads to increased demand, leads to record outputs? That really doesn't make sense. It should say "Scarcity leads to increased demand leads to higher prices and further scarcity".

I think the underlying issue for me here is understand (remembering) the mission with RRE. We need "help resolve the paradox". Some RRE questions can be surprisingly clean in their correct ACs to the point that it reminds me of PSA questions. In those cases, the correct answer jumps out. The challenge will be with more subtle, looser ACs such as this one.