PrepTest 106, Section 4, Question 16
Recently, a new school of economics called steady-state(440 more words not shown)
According to the passage, steady-state(10 more words not shown)
- Amay deplete natural(11 more words not shown)
- Bmay convert natural(12 more words not shown)
- Cmay proliferate goods(10 more words not shown)
- Dmay create income(11 more words not shown)
- Emay increase the(13 more words not shown)
Reading the passage
Why is further growth dangerous on the steady-state account? Beyond the optimal size, environmental costs rise faster than the benefits people receive. We can still get benefits from additional production; the problem is that those gains don't keep pace with the damage. Look for that comparison.
Working the answers
- A
Discovering replacement natural resources isn't the comparison given. The text compares environmental costs with benefits to producers and consumers.
- B
This compares resource conversion with improvements in efficiency. Conservation comes up later as an alternative, but that isn't the stated reason growth beyond the optimal size is dangerous.
- C
Finding markets for products is a different problem. The concern here is what additional production costs the environment.
- D
Income inequities appear in the neoclassical defense of growth. They aren't the steady-state explanation for this danger.
- ECorrect
Paragraph 2 says growth beyond the ideal point would make environmental costs rise faster than producers’ and consumers’ gains. E preserves both sides and the rate comparison. It doesn't need to claim that all growth is harmful or that additional production provides no benefits.
More Detail questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Detail questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.