LSAT Explanation PT 45, S1, Q26: Rapid population growth can be disastrous
LSAT Question Stem
Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
Logical Reasoning Question Type
This is a Strengthen question.
Correct Answer
The correct answer to this question is E.
LSAT Question Complete Explanation
First, let's analyze the argument in the passage. The passage claims that rapid population growth can be disastrous for a small city. The premises supporting this conclusion are that: 1) ideally, there should be at least one municipal employee for every hundred residents; 2) when too many people move in at once, city services responsible for utilities and permits are quickly overloaded; and 3) most city budgets do not allow for the immediate hiring of new staff. The conclusion is that rapid population growth can be disastrous for a small city.
To make the argument more accessible, let's use a simple example. Imagine a small town with a population of 1,000 people and 10 municipal employees. If the population suddenly doubles to 2,000 people, the town would need 20 municipal employees to maintain the ideal ratio. However, the town's budget may not allow for hiring 10 more employees right away, leading to overloaded city services and potential disaster.
An "Evaluate" question for this argument could be: "Do new residents contribute to the city's budget through taxes or other means?"
Now let's discuss the question type and what it's asking us to do. This is a Strengthen question, which means we need to find the answer choice that, if true, would most strengthen the argument.
Answer choice (A): This choice explains the city's priorities during budget shortages, but it doesn't address whether a city would be overloaded by growth and face disaster. If anything, it might weaken the argument by suggesting that a city could initially avoid disaster by focusing on essential services.
Answer choice (B): This choice is not relevant to the argument since it focuses on new ideas rather than the city's ability to handle rapid population growth. Even if new ideas could affect the city's finances, it's unclear whether these ideas would have positive or negative effects on the argument.
Answer choice (C): This choice compares small cities to large cities, which is irrelevant to the argument since it focuses on the difficulties of small cities.
Answer choice (D): Unemployment rates do not directly impact the argument. While a low unemployment rate could mean higher wages and more expensive city staff, it could also mean that people moving to the city are unskilled and could be hired inexpensively. The effect of unemployment rates on the argument is uncertain, making this choice incorrect.
Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer. If most new residents do not begin paying taxes for at least a year, the city will have to provide services to these residents without receiving additional funds from them for a year. This directly addresses the argument's disregard for the fact that new people bring new money by stating that there is a significant period where there are new people, but no new city tax money. This strengthens the argument that rapid population growth can be disastrous for a small city.