Final answer:
Option c is the correct answer. The increase in both the price and quantity demanded of corn does not negate the law of demand. The observed changes likely result from other factors not accounted for by price alone, such as changes in market conditions or consumer behavior, which violate the ceteris paribus assumption that all other things are held equal.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question asks whether the law of demand does not apply to corn, given that the price and quantity demanded both increased from one year to the next. The correct answer is C) No, because the other-things-equal assumption was violated over the two year period. This implies that other factors, not reflected in the simple price-quantity relationship, could have influenced the demand for corn, such as changes in consumer preferences, incomes, prices of related goods, or other market conditions.
LibreTexts reminds us that a perfectly competitive firm will not sell below the equilibrium price, indicating that the observed price changes for corn must align with market equilibria, contingent upon supply and demand factors.
Furthermore, the rise in corn acreage as noted by LibreTexts is due to converging prices, which may also explain why the quantity of corn demanded increased despite a price rise. Typically, an increase in price would lead to a decrease in demand, according to the law of supply and demand; however, external factors may have altered the overall demand.