# Logical Reasoning - Statement and Conclusion - Discussion

Discussion Forum : Statement and Conclusion - Section 1 (Q.No. 25)
Directions to Solve

In each question below is given a statement followed by two conclusions numbered I and II. You have to assume everything in the statement to be true, then consider the two conclusions together and decide which of them logically follows beyond a reasonable doubt from the information given in the statement.

• (A) If only conclusion I follows
• (B) If only conclusion II follows
• (C) If either I or II follows
• (D) If neither I nor II follows and
• (E) If both I and II follow.

25.

Statements: Vegetable prices are soaring in the market.

Conclusions:

1. Vegetables are becoming a rare commodity.
2. People cannot eat vegetables.
Only conclusion I follows
Only conclusion II follows
Either I or II follows
Neither I nor II follows
Both I and II follow
Explanation:
The availability of vegetables is not mentioned in the given statement. So, I does not follow Also, II is not directly related to the statement and so it also does not follow.
Discussion:
26 comments Page 1 of 3.

Kevin said:   4 years ago
I think the reason Answer I does not follow is that "soar" and "rare" are not definitive. If the prices "soar" it doesn't necessarily mean vegetables are unobtainable. If vegetables are "rare" it doesn't mean that every vegetable will be auctioned off among the billionaires. (Bill Gates and Warren Buffett playing poker to win the last carrot on Earth would be funny!).

Jashr said:   5 years ago
@Twincle.

"vegetables are becoming a rare commodity" means they are available in the market but in less quantity. And if supply is less the price will increase.

Karl said:   6 years ago
I think the statement 'people cannot eat vegetable' is the same as 'all people cannot eat vegetables' which is clearly false. People cannot eat cars, vegetables we can eat.

REM said:   6 years ago
I think the Correct answer is OPTION A.
(1)

Marge Inovera said:   6 years ago
Economies are always affected by political (e.g Corruption, Ujjwal mentioned, non-capitalist poltical economies), socio-cultural (fads), and regional (high avg socioeconomic status in a locality) factors that could impact price. While this would be consistent with given correct answer, the question leaves something to be desired because this level of analysis is sophisticated and non-intuitive for anybody familiar with a law (supply vs Demand) so fundamental to market economics as to be virtually mathematical in its logic.

Suresh said:   7 years ago
I think the first assumption is correct. The prices increase when there is less supply or when there is more demand - both of these indicate that the commodity is rare.

Kavi said:   8 years ago
In my opinion only conclusion I is correct. Rich people, vegetable vendors and farmers will eat them otherwise the available vegetable will be wasted.

Daud said:   8 years ago
I think statement 1 follow because it says that vegetable price raising. I think vegetable price raising when it's stoke is very short or production very short in this reason I can say 1 is follow because if people can't eat vegetable as a result of it vegetable stoke getting huge henceforth price getting down. Why price getting up?

Ajit bone said:   8 years ago
If vegetables are much quantity available in market then purchaser are in less numbers, automatically it's prices are become very low. The same vice verse, that implicit I is correct.

Gunasekaran said:   9 years ago
Definitely say only first assumption is correct. Because vegetables are rare commodity. When demand increases it is a rare commodity. When demand increases the price also increase. (vegetables are soaring in the market).