Logical reasoning PrepTest 130 · Section 1 · Question 19

Incorrect. This answer doesn't connect the proposed solution—lowering income taxes—to the root problems, so it creates a connection the argument doesn't need. In fact, this answer reverses and negates one of the relationships established in the premises.

Incorrect. Again, this answer choice doesn't tie into the conclusion about lowering income taxes. This answer reverses an established relationship.

Incorrect. So close! This answer does tie into the solution offered in the stimulus, but it talks about what will happen if the solution isn't implemented, not if it is. That's a negation of what we're looking for.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen with Necessary Premise

Stimulus Summary:
Prices being high and wages being low are causing reluctance to spend, causing a weak economy. So lowering income taxes will cause the economy to improve.

Answer Anticipation:
While the argument does have a causal conclusion, it also has causal premises, so this argument doesn't make a jump from correlation to causation, so we need to look elsewhere for the gap.

Instead, we should frame this question through a common frame: Problem/solution. There's a problem noted in the premises—the economy is weak, because consumer spending is low, because prices are high and wages are low. The solution presented in the conclusion—lower income taxes. In order for that solution to work, however, we need to know how it'll impact the root causes of the weak economy. If lowering income taxes doesn't lower prices, raise wages, or increase consumer spending, then it won't work. Let's find an answer that says the proposed solution will, in fact, have the desired effect!

Answer Explanation:
This answer ties the solution proposed in the conclusion to a root cause of the problem. If lowering income taxes won't increase consumer spending (i.e., lower consumer reluctance to spend), then there's no reason to believe that that solution will have the desired effect.

Key Takeaway:
One frequent argument frame on the LSAT is the problem/solution frame (it also appears in Reading Comp). When you can frame an argument this way, it's frequently the case that the conclusion is the author's solution to the problem. Analyzing the argument this way can make it a lot easier to break the argument down!

Incorrect. Government spending is out of scope of the argument.