QUESTION TEXT: From 1996 to 2004, the average family income…
QUESTION TYPE: Weaken – Exception
CONCLUSION: Opponents say the 10% decline in average family income is the political party’s fault.
REASONING: No reasoning is given.
ANALYSIS: There was a 10% inflation-adjusted decline in family income from 1996-2004.
No reasoning is given. And this is an “exception” question, so there are many ways to weaken the opposition’s claim. Just look at the answers with an open mind.
- CORRECT. This isn’s significant. It’s probable there were ups and downs in individual years. The main point is that over the whole period from 1996-2004, incomes fells 10%.
- This suggests the decline isn’t the party’s fault or even a problem. For instance, maybe some families decided to spend more time traveling or taking care of their children. This leads to less income, but there’s nothing wrong with that.
- This shows the party wasn’t responsible. The decline was due to international trouble.
- This suggests the decline is due to demographic change, not any bad policy.
- This shows the causes of the decline occurred before the party took power.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly