Negated the answer choice and I got it thank the lawd!
Hi there! I'm in Oakland, CA and looking for a study group or study buddy for the LSAT. I'm planning on taking the exam in October (and again in November if I'm not happy with my score).
Don't know if a group exists already but if not, let's link up!
I figured this question out but it took me like 15 minutes to map out the conditional chain :( there has to be a quicker way wtf
This is how I compared option B to the original:
We should either make curtains for the windows or buy blinds.
We should either devote airtime to other music or only play classical music.
Since the windows are not standard sizes, if we buy blinds we will have to special order them.
Since our classical audience did not generate enough ad revenue to pay our bills, if we only play classical we risk going out of business.
Since we do not have time to wait for special orders, we should make the curtains.
Since we cannot risk going out of business, we should devote some other airtime to other music.
It's a little clunky but helped me understand why B was correct
If we negate option E (Acme's move WILL be accompanied by a significant pay raise for employees), then there's a stronger chance that employees will be able to move closer to Ocean View, making their commute less than 30 minutes.
This is how I'm trying to understand it, but I still feel wishy washy because the negation assumes that employees will STILL be able to afford housing in Ocean View. #help plz
#help How is 'underqualified' a distraction in the stimulus when it is a component of answer choice E?