I, too, found myself debating between answers C and E, rwraulynaitis. I think the text that you have quoted in the second paragraph provides half the picture. The other half is found at the very end of the passage:
nations that do well according to human indicators may thrive even if their per capita GNP remains stable or lags behind that of other nations.
Putting those two parts together gets us a sort of inverse relationship: a nation with a high GNP can be doing poorly while a nation that lags behind in GNP can thrive. "Thrive" suggests to me that they are doing better than those nations described in the text you quoted, and that is how I eventually determined that answer C WAS supported by the text, at least a little bit, while E had no support at all (there was no practical advice as to how to accomplish those goals, just a claim that a shift in focus would be required.) Picking the answer with some support over the one with no support is something we do all over the LSAT!
Also, thinking more holistically about answer C, the passage is generally about how a shift in focus to human factors and distribution of income rather than average income could change the way we view economic health of a nation. While we don't know if any nation with a lower GNP actually IS healthier than one with a higher GNP, this does give us an idea of how they COULD BE economically healthier. So the passage does provide information about how that CAN happen, even if we cannot be sure there is a real case where it does.
Adam M. Tyson
PowerScore LSAT, GRE, ACT and SAT Instructor
Follow me on Twitter at https://twitter.com/LSATadam