【自己已解决】请求一道题 分析逻辑链

82嘿嘿熊

In the United States, of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired, the percentage who retired to Florida has decreased by three percentage points over the past ten years.Since many local businesses in Florida cater to retirees, this decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

• Florida attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state.
• The number of people who move out of Florida to accept employment in other states has increased over the past ten years.
• There are far more local businesses in Florida that cater to tourists than there are local businesses that cater to retirees.
• The total number of people who retired and moved to another state for their retirement has increased significantly over the past ten years.
• The number of people who left Florida when they retired to live in another state was greater last year than it was ten years ago.
  

我的逻辑链是：因：去佛罗里达的退休外州人减少3%，且佛的经济又很多是针对退休人员的
                            果：佛罗里达经济会有负面影响
问削弱

我一开始脑袋里想的是 外州人的减少不一定会影响佛州经济，也可以是本州的退休人员增加他们来贡献money，之类的可能性。但是为什么答案是围绕人数来的呀？为什么普遍意义上退休人口的增加会削弱这个题的argument。（看这个答案我觉得我逻辑链错了，可是我想不明白正确的逻辑链是什么，我的逻辑链为什么不对。Can somebody help me out?）---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
解题思路：原文“the declines” have negative effect。百分比减小不代表人数减小。若总人数上涨，那么去佛州的人数依然可以保证佛州的退休行业经济。！！！所以果应该是见效的百分比会对佛州经济有负面影响。

茄子要加油

逻辑链是去F的百分比减少了--》经济坏了
其实有个gap吧，就是去F百分比少了--》去F人少了--》F经济坏了
这里攻击人没少，就是相关的，对的；说其他的方法提供经济来源，就是无关选项了。。。
lz你再继续做做CR题目看看，我记得不止一道是有这样错误的，拿百分比去推断的，最后攻击点都是数量反向变化，所以总量不一定怎么变。