I second guessed myself here thinking B was too simple and since C was worded a bit more complex, it might be a better choice than B: no more choosing answers I do not fully understand
For C - isn't there an absence of evidence that the constituents oppose the bill to reduce corporate income tax, and there is the existence of evidence that they do not want high taxes, and the argument is confusing 'they do not want high taxes' for 'they support lowering the corporate income tax.' still having a hard time understanding how C is wrong
this question felt like a word salad because i highlighted 'corporate income tax.'
I immediately thought the answer would point to how the constituents would find reducing corporate income tax irrelevant to them on a personal level--because of the inadequate wording of the survey (like who likes high taxes??) my thought process was like yeah voters don't like high taxes because they personally don't want to pay high taxes. But what's corporate income tax got to do with this?
I had to spend some time analyzing each answer choice and finally arrive at B.
Am I the only one who was skeptical about the author's choice to use public opinion on high taxes generally to support a more narrow application of reducing high taxes?
For instance, no one wants higher income taxes on their own personal income, and may therefore respond to the poll stating 'no' to higher taxes. However, the author seemed to misinterpret this generalized definition of 'taxes' in the poll and apply it to support his conclusion on the narrow scope of 'corporate income tax,' which we were not given insight on.
To me, it seemed like the flaw was between the subject shift from 'high taxes' to 'corporate income tax.' I picked the wrong answer choice, 'C,' for this reason.
Are we just to assume the author is correct to conflate these two things? I'm not seeing how this subject shift is permissible, when in other question types this would be a glaring assumption to bridge.
I can't understand this at all. Just because somebody doesn't support a raise doesn't mean they support a cut. They might want it to stay the same. What does the amount of the tax have to do with it?
I had a lot of trouble understanding why C is wrong but this is what I came up with: we can't make this claim because the legislator never even looked for evidence of opposition or support for the bill. Instead, they used polling data about the issue of taxation at large, which overwhelmingly pointed at opposition to high taxes. Therefore, our job is to expose why this data is not sufficient to indicate support for a bill as stated.
#help I was thinking the flaw in this question was that even though the staff doesn't support higher taxes, it's wrong to assume they would support the bill because we don't know what else the bill would do. The bill could lower taxes but also do other things that people wouldn't support so you can't just say that since they don't support higher taxes, they'll support the bill. And that's why I chose C because just because you don't have evidence that they'll oppose other aspects of the bill, doesn't mean you have enough evidence to know that they will support the bill because they don't want higher taxes..right???
bro took way too much time explaining why A is wrong. Also not fully convinced on B. What if the constituents did not think the current tax was too high? would they oppose an even lower tax or wouldn't they still be in favor?
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
65 comments
I second guessed myself here thinking B was too simple and since C was worded a bit more complex, it might be a better choice than B: no more choosing answers I do not fully understand
I am so scared to submit my answers
Spelling error in stimulus description. "assumptionrequired" lol
For C - isn't there an absence of evidence that the constituents oppose the bill to reduce corporate income tax, and there is the existence of evidence that they do not want high taxes, and the argument is confusing 'they do not want high taxes' for 'they support lowering the corporate income tax.' still having a hard time understanding how C is wrong
I keep second guessing myself ughhhh
this question felt like a word salad because i highlighted 'corporate income tax.'
I immediately thought the answer would point to how the constituents would find reducing corporate income tax irrelevant to them on a personal level--because of the inadequate wording of the survey (like who likes high taxes??) my thought process was like yeah voters don't like high taxes because they personally don't want to pay high taxes. But what's corporate income tax got to do with this?
I had to spend some time analyzing each answer choice and finally arrive at B.
Am I the only one who was skeptical about the author's choice to use public opinion on high taxes generally to support a more narrow application of reducing high taxes?
For instance, no one wants higher income taxes on their own personal income, and may therefore respond to the poll stating 'no' to higher taxes. However, the author seemed to misinterpret this generalized definition of 'taxes' in the poll and apply it to support his conclusion on the narrow scope of 'corporate income tax,' which we were not given insight on.
To me, it seemed like the flaw was between the subject shift from 'high taxes' to 'corporate income tax.' I picked the wrong answer choice, 'C,' for this reason.
Are we just to assume the author is correct to conflate these two things? I'm not seeing how this subject shift is permissible, when in other question types this would be a glaring assumption to bridge.
#help
I can't understand this at all. Just because somebody doesn't support a raise doesn't mean they support a cut. They might want it to stay the same. What does the amount of the tax have to do with it?
Correct, in 33s! Definitely a new record for me. It's odd how some questions click immediately and others are indecipherable word salad.
damn i was on such a roll before this one! I was so confident in C that i didn't even blind review it, oops
Wow! I actually hate these questions
oh hell yes finally
I had a lot of trouble understanding why C is wrong but this is what I came up with: we can't make this claim because the legislator never even looked for evidence of opposition or support for the bill. Instead, they used polling data about the issue of taxation at large, which overwhelmingly pointed at opposition to high taxes. Therefore, our job is to expose why this data is not sufficient to indicate support for a bill as stated.
I chose C in Blind Review but chose B in the first go. Common L from me
"Oh, 97% are against high taxes. This means theyre supporting my CORPORATE income tax."
How many of that 97% fall under that corporate income tax? Probably few.
I quit
as a history & poli sci major i ate up the bit about the authoritarian regime
#help I still don't understand how B is correct but I see how the rest are wrong.
#help I was thinking the flaw in this question was that even though the staff doesn't support higher taxes, it's wrong to assume they would support the bill because we don't know what else the bill would do. The bill could lower taxes but also do other things that people wouldn't support so you can't just say that since they don't support higher taxes, they'll support the bill. And that's why I chose C because just because you don't have evidence that they'll oppose other aspects of the bill, doesn't mean you have enough evidence to know that they will support the bill because they don't want higher taxes..right???
bro took way too much time explaining why A is wrong. Also not fully convinced on B. What if the constituents did not think the current tax was too high? would they oppose an even lower tax or wouldn't they still be in favor?
LOL how did i pick E! i've been doing just fine up until this question..... my point is.... we are bound to get some wrong, even silly ones like this.
when i'm between two ACs and end up choosing the wrong one 😍
why are these so hard :(
we got this guys, keep going!
this one gagged me im ngl