PrepTest 107, Section 4, Question 2
Economist: To the extent that homelessness arises from(52 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(25 more words not shown)
- AIt limits the(10 more words not shown)
- BIt suggests that(10 more words not shown)
- CIt is offered(6 more words not shown)
- DIt expresses the(5 more words not shown)
- EIt suggests a(7 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
I can see why a private investor would want a return. Building housing puts money at risk, and the economist says we shouldn't expect investors to take that risk for no benefit.
But are private investors the only possible source of housing? What if the government built it? That possibility makes me hesitate before treating private profit as the whole story. We can understand the incentive the economist describes without assuming every way of supplying housing depends on it.
The question asks about the opening qualification: “To the extent that homelessness arises from a lack of available housing.” To identify its role, first find the point being qualified. The economist says we should not assume the profit motive is at fault. The claims about investors' incentives are the reasons offered for that point.
What we’re looking for
The opening words tell us when that discussion applies. They aren't claiming that every case of homelessness comes from too few homes. There could be other causes. They're saying: insofar as a housing shortage contributes to homelessness, here is the economist's response to blaming profit. I'd describe that as a qualification limiting the reach of the argument.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
The economist addresses the part of homelessness attributable to a lack of available housing. If some homelessness has other causes, the argument needn't explain those causes. The opening phrase draws that boundary around the discussion rather than presenting a complete account of homelessness.
- B
“To the extent that” doesn't tell us how large that extent is. Lack of housing could be one contributor without being the primary cause. We should not turn a limited qualification into a claim that this cause outweighs all the others.
- C
The phrase isn't evidence demonstrating that the profit motive is blameless. It tells us the circumstances within which to consider the argument. The actual supporting reasoning comes afterward: investors generally supply housing when they can profit, and expecting them to take risks without a benefit is unrealistic.
- D
The conclusion is that the profit motive should not automatically be blamed for this part of the problem. The phrase we're asked about comes just before that claim and qualifies its application. It isn't itself the position the investor discussion is meant to establish.
- E
Identifying which part of a problem we're discussing does not propose a solution. The phrase doesn't recommend building houses, changing incentives, or taking any other action. It sets the scope of the economist's argument about where blame should fall.
More Role/Main Point questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Role/Main Point questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.