LSAT Explanation PT 22, S4, Q23: Party spokesperson: The opposition party's proposal

LSAT Question Stem

The spokesperson proceeds by 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Method of Reasoning question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is B. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

First, let's analyze the argument in the passage. The party spokesperson is arguing against the opposition party's proposal to stimulate economic activity by refunding $600 million in provincial taxes. The spokesperson claims that this proposal would not result in a net increase in spending to stimulate the province's economy. The argument's structure can be summarized as follows:

Premise 1: The province's budget is required to be in balance.

Premise 2: If the $600 million is refunded, new taxes would be needed or workers would be dismissed.

Conclusion: There can be no resulting net increase in spending to stimulate the province's economy.

Now, let's discuss the question type and what it's asking us to do. This is a Method of Reasoning (MOR) question, which asks us to identify how the spokesperson proceeds in their argument.

Let's examine each answer choice:

a) Reinterpreting a term that is central to an opposing argument

- The spokesperson does not reinterpret any terms from the opposition party's argument. They simply analyze the consequences of the proposed refund.

b) Arguing that a predicted advantage would be offset by an accompanying disadvantage

- This is the correct answer. The spokesperson argues that the opposition party's predicted advantage of increased spending will be offset by the disadvantages of either raising new taxes or dismissing workers.

c) Casting doubt on the motives of opponents

- The spokesperson does not question the opposition party's motives. They focus on the consequences of the proposal.

d) Drawing a distinction between different kinds of economic activity

- The spokesperson does not classify or differentiate between various economic activities. They focus on the overall impact of the proposal on spending.

e) Seeking to show that the assumption that taxpayers would spend money that might be refunded to them is dubious

- The spokesperson does not question the assumption that taxpayers would spend the refunded money. They argue that the overall impact on spending would not result in a net increase.

In summary, the correct answer is B, as the spokesperson argues that the predicted advantage of the opposition party's proposal would be offset by an accompanying disadvantage.