LR Drill Set 8, Question 8
In an attempt to reduce spending on highways,(62 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(6 more words not shown)
- AThe increased speeds(27 more words not shown)
- BIf highway traffic(26 more words not shown)
- CThe number of(30 more words not shown)
- DUsing only the(22 more words not shown)
- EMost of the(28 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Why would changing when we drive make highways cheaper?
I can see how the tolls might change traffic. Charge more when the road is busy, and some people may go earlier or later to save money. But shifting a trip to another hour doesn't obviously reduce the wear it puts on the road. We still need a connection to spending.
The conclusion narrows that issue: it is about construction of new highways. Maybe we build extra routes because too many people want to travel at the same time. If we spread those drivers across the day, perhaps we won't need as many new roads to handle the rush.
What we’re looking for
That's the connection I'd look for in a strengthener: a lower rush-hour burden means less construction is needed. The passage gives us the more-even distribution of traffic. What remains to explain is why that change saves money on building highways.
Working the answers
- A
A quicker commute could let someone live farther from work. That doesn't tell us why constructing new highways would cost less. Longer trips could even add to the amount of travel the roads must accommodate. Also, driving faster in lighter traffic needn't mean breaking the speed limit; the problem with A is its failure to supply the construction-savings connection.
- B
This introduces a possible offset to the benefit. People who used to take mass transit would begin driving, adding vehicles to the highways. We aren't told the offset would erase the improvement, but adding traffic is no reason to expect less construction. It pushes against the argument's hoped-for savings rather than supporting them.
- CCorrect
We may still build new highways, but they can need fewer lanes. If lane count depends more on the busiest period than on average use, reducing the peak reduces the capacity we need to build. Imagine traffic spread out enough that a new highway can handle it with two lanes instead of five. That gives us a reason to expect lower construction costs. This is a little different from the prediction of needing fewer routes, but it supplies the same missing connection: spreading traffic reduces how much highway we have to construct.
- D
Existing technology already allowing higher tolls at typically busy times doesn't establish a saving on construction. Perhaps we could obtain a similar traffic effect without the new system. That concerns how the change could be implemented, while the conclusion is conditional: if the proposed technology is developed, will the resulting traffic pattern reduce construction spending? D doesn't provide the link we need.
- E
Inflexible work hours could make it harder for commuters to shift their trips out of rush hour. That is relevant to how well the plan changes traffic; it isn't just a comment about employers being nice. But it gives us a difficulty for the plan, not a reason the more-even traffic would reduce the cost of new highways. It cannot strengthen the argument.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.