Interesting to see what the author is doing in this regard. The author is refuting the refute (economists') against a criticism (many people's). And that makes C) the answer.
Let's see why other answer choices are wrong.
A) Paradox is a statement that contradicts itself. (and still might be true, and that's what makes paradox interesting) There doesn't seem to be any paradox present here.
B) The author simply points out how economists response is insufficient, not argues for legal reform.
D) No decision has been made here to explain. The author simply points out a bad argument by economists.
E) What concept?