LSAT 109 – Section 4 – Question 23

LSAT 109 - Section 4 - Question 23

December 2000

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Target time: 1:07

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question QuickView	Type	Tags	Answer Choices	Curve	Question Difficulty	Psg/Game/S Difficulty	Explanation
PT109 S4 Q23	+LR +Exp	Method of reasoning or descriptive +Method Net Effect +NetEff	A 1% 161 B 87% 167 C 1% 156 D 3% 158 E 8% 160	142 150 158	+Medium	150.49 +SubsectionHarder

Party spokesperson: The opposition party’s proposal to stimulate economic activity in the province by refunding $600 million in provincial taxes to taxpayers, who could be expected to spend the money, envisions an illusory benefit. Since the province’s budget is required to be in balance, either new taxes would be needed to make up the shortfall, in which case the purpose of the refund would be defeated, or else workers for the province would be dismissed. So either the province’s taxpayers or its workers, who are also residents of the province, will have the $600 million to spend, but there can be no resulting net increase in spending to stimulate the province’s economy.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position

The spokesperson concludes the opposition party’s plan to stimulate the economy envisions an illusory benefit. As evidence, the spokesperson states the province’s budget is required to be in balance. Either new taxes need to make up for the shortfall, or workers for the province will be dismissed. As a result, there will be no net increase in spending to stimulate the economy.

Describe Method of Reasoning

The spokesperson counters the position held by the opposing party. He does this by pointing out that an anticipated advantage of the opposing party’s plan would be offset by a disadvantage. Even if the province’s taxpayers are refunded $600 million, the need for a new tax to make up for the shortfall or the need to dismiss workers will negate the positive effects of the refunds.

reinterpreting a term that is central to an opposing argument

The spokesperson does not reinterpret any term.

arguing that a predicted advantage would be offset by an accompanying disadvantage

The predicted advantage is the advantage of the province’s taxpayers having $600 million to spend. The accompanying disadvantage is the need to either have a new tax make up for the shortfall or dismiss workers for the province.

casting doubt on the motives of opponents

The spokesperson does not address the motivations of the opposing party. The spokesperson addresses the opposing party’s claim directly.

drawing a distinction between different kinds of economic activity

The spokesperson does not address different kinds of economic activity.

seeking to show that the assumption that taxpayers would spend money that might be refunded to them is dubious

The spokesperson does not argue that the province’s taxpayers would not spend the money. In fact, the spokesperson concedes that taxpayers would have $600 million to spend.

LSAT 109 – Section 4 – Question 23

LSAT 109 - Section 4 - Question 23

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 109 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Leave a Reply Cancel