help me

[sana.noor]

while watching Ron Video's regarding CR question, i have learned something new. i am still confuse regarding the use of Facts. Ron said that we should not touch "Facts" in CR questions, but i wana know why we shouldnt. i am posting a question here taken from Ron's video.

Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed cashew nuts in order to ensure that the nuts are sold to domestic processing plants. If the tariff were lifted and unprocessed cashews were sold at world market prices, more farmers could profit by growing cashews. However, since all the processing plants are in urban areas, removing the tariff would seriously hamper the government's effort to reduce urban unemployment over the next five years.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
A) Some of the byproducts of processing cashews are used for manufacturing paints and plastics.
B) Other countries in which cashews are processed subsidize their processing plants.
C) More people in Kernland are engaged in farming cashews than in processing them.
D) Buying unprocessed cashews at lower than world market prices enables cashew processors in Kernland to sell processed nuts at competitive prices
E) A lack of profitable crops is driving an increasing number of small farmers in Kernland off their land and into the cities.
OA is E but i am still confused why not C

C says that more people are engaged in farming than processing, so if government do impose tariff, it gonna hurt more to farmers than to processing units. however, as this fact said that less people are involved in processing, it means it will effect less on employment rate.

[RonPurewal]

Hi,
This question is from GMAT Prep, so please re-post it in the GMAT Prep folder.

Also, I can't actually understand what you are asking (or what you're saying about facts, etc.) Perhaps you could phrase your question more clearly when you post another thread.

Thanks.