Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 32.6K All Categories
- 27.4K LSAT
- 16.7K General
- 5.1K Logical Reasoning
- 1.3K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 73 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 9 Scholarships
- 193 Test Center Reviews
- 2K Study Groups
- 109 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.5K Specific LSAT Dates
- 28 June 2024 LSAT
- 3 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 23 January 2024 LSAT
- 37 November 2023 LSAT
- 42 October 2023 LSAT
- 12 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 18 August 2024 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 4.9K Not LSAT
- 4K Law School Admissions
- 13 Law School Explained
- 10 Forum Rules
- 595 Technical Problems
- 277 Off-topic
PT75.S3.Q22 - From 1996 to 2004, the average...
Rev_Lefe
Member
Could someone please explain further about E?
In terms of (E), how do we know that "the biggest decreases in family income" were occurred within the period from 1996 to 2004? Because of this trouble, I picked E under the concept that I can't make an unwarranted assumption about the time the biggest decreases occurred. I can't really figure out what did I miss.
Thank you for your help.
Admin Note: https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-75-section-3-question-22/
Comments
It's a weaken (except) question. When you manipulate arguments, you're not supposed to question the answer choice's truth, you're supposed to plug it into the argument to ascertain its impact ("which of the following, if true...").
Plugged in, the answer choice takes the blame off of the ruling party, attacking the idea that the decreases are the ruling party's fault.