#23 - Editor: The city's previous recycling program, which

[Adam Tyson]

We don't need to assume that it would have that effect, but only recognize that it could have that effect. If answer D is true, it should at least make us think a little harder about the author's argument and raise some doubts about whether they are correct or not. That's all a good Weaken answer has to do! We don't need proof that they are wrong. We just need something that raises some doubts about their conclusion.

[ethansamuelharris@gmail.com]

Hi, why isn't it C? If the new program takes less time, doesn't that mean it will be more cost effective?

[Adam Tyson]

Not necessarily, Ethan! Less time might still involve higher costs overall, or the same cost. If it takes half the time but you do it twice as often, where's the benefit? Plus this doesn't address the key element of the argument, which is whether more recyclables will be collected or not. That's the part that the author thinks is absurd.