LSAT 147 – Section 1 – Question 22

LSAT 147 - Section 1 - Question 22

September 2016

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:40

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT147 S1 Q22
+LR
Argument part +AP
Net Effect +NetEff
A
33%
161
B
23%
159
C
4%
156
D
2%
152
E
38%
165
158
167
176
 +Hardest 147.09 +SubsectionMedium

Consumer advocate: Economists reason that price gouging—increasing the price of goods when no alternative seller is available—is efficient because it allocates goods to people whose willingness to pay more shows that they really need those goods. But willingness to pay is not proportional to need. In the real world, some people simply cannot pay as much as others. As a result, a price increase will allocate goods to the people with the most money, not to those with the most need.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The consumer advocate argues that price gouging does not efficiently allocate goods to those with the most need but rather to those with the most money. While some economists believe that increasing prices during shortages effectively allocates goods by prioritizing those willing to pay more, the author disputes this. The author contends that willingness to pay is not proportional to need since some people simply cannot pay as much as others.

Identify Argument Part
This claim directly counters the economists' argument that those willing to pay more for a good must *need* the good more. The consumer advocate calls out this assumption by suggesting that those with the most money will end up with the desired good.

A
It disputes one explanation in order to make way for an alternative explanation.
This is not an alternative explanation. It is part of the consumer advocate’s reasoning that is used to reject the economist’s argument.
B
It is the overall conclusion of the argument.
This is not the conclusion of the argument. This supports the conclusion that a price increase will allocate goods to people with the most money.
C
It is a component of reasoning disputed in the argument.
This is not something that the author disputes. The consumer advocate believes this statement and uses it to dispute the economists’ reasoning.
D
It is a general principle whose validity the argument questions.
The argument does not question the validity of this statement. The author believes this statement and uses it to support the main conclusion.
E
It denies a claim that the argument takes to be assumed in the reasoning that it rejects.
This is a tough answer choice to parse through, but it’s dead on. This statement denies a claim (that willingness to pay a price reflects the level of need) that is assumed by the economists’ position, which the author wishes to reject.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 147 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply