PT 72, question about an individual RC question (spoiler) Forum

[LSAT Hacks (Graeme)]

I'm writing explanations for LSAT preptest 72. I can't figure out question 22 on RC (happens to me sometimes too!).

The credited answer is C. It says both answers discuss whether a flat tax system can be fair to everyone. I see how the first passage discusses this (lines 15-17), but I don't see where passage B considers the question. In the first paragraph they talk about whether a progressive tax system is fair (yes). But I don't see them discussing whether a flat tax is always unfair as a result.

The best justification I can make is that the middle classes are more conscious of expenses than the rich are, and the new flat tax system will force the middle class to pay more (hence, flat taxes are unfair to middle classes). But this feels like a stretch.

Am I missing something? I thought D was correct. The first passage raises the objection that progressive systems encourage the rich to avoid taxes. The second passage discusses the (mythical) objection that progressive taxes are unfair.

[Jeffort]

From your analysis it appears to me that you are misinterpreting the question type/task/what is being asked.

It looks like you are treating it like an explicit statements/what was stated question type, which are typically regurgitate the details focused questions. Meaning that it sounds like you're treating the requirements of the question stem to be something more like "Both passages state/establish an answer(s) to which one of the following questions?", requiring both passages to have stated/given a firm direct answer to the question.

The stem is actually asking a big picture synthesis main idea type of question. The language of the stem is critical "...are concerned with answering...". That means which question is about a big main issue/idea both authors addressed/focused on and considered/evaluated. The word 'concerned' is key, it doesn't require that firm answers were given for the question and appears to be a nice new twist in phrasing LSAC used for asking a main point question with unexpected/unusual phrasing that sounds like a different question type to make the question extra tricky, with (D) being the trap answer designed to sound perfectly correct to people that misinterpret what the stem is really asking for.

All of passage B is directly focused on discussing the main issue of the fairness of flat tax vs graduated taxes. The first line of the first paragraph is the main topic sentence for passage B, setting the context and then immediately transitions into discussing fairness. As a whole, passage B entirely focuses on and revolves around comparing flat tax to graduated taxes in terms of fairness and differential impacts of the two on different classes of people. Plus, it also concludes at the end of the last paragraph that flat taxes are unfair to the middle class, it just doesn't say it straight out in one sentence using the word unfair. Instead it establishes the conclusion that flat tax is not fair to all taxpayers via implication/synthesis by stating that the middle class will have to make up the taxfall difference, which according to the passage is by definition unfair since it's unequal.

All of Passage A revolves entirely around comparing flat tax to 'progressive' tax systems in terms of fairness, with the issue of fairness explicitly introduced at the beginning of the second paragraph. The rest of the passage compares the two tax systems in terms of fairness about how they effect different taxpayers differently.

Therefore, even though the passages compare Flat tax to a different alternative tax method than the other does, they both evaluate the fairness of flat tax as it affects people in different income classes, thus (C).

I think your issue with not liking CR (C) possibly due to misinterpreting the requirements of the stem was because the author of Passage B never clearly took and directly stated a position on the issue of the question. Is my assessment of your thought process in the ballpark? Being concerned with and addressing an issue doesn't require the author to take sides and/or state/take/imply an opinion on answers to the question, only that the author at least focused on evaluating the topic the question is about/explored relevant things helpful for trying to figuring out an answer to the question.

This help clear it up? Since this stem is phrased very similarly to another RC question type "Both passages answer which one of the following questions?", it's easy to overlook that it's really a bigger picture main point/synthesis question type rather than more of a what was explicitly stated type of question.

[LSAT Hacks (Graeme)]

I think your issue with not liking CR (C) possibly due to misinterpreting the requirements of the stem was because the author of Passage B never clearly took and directly stated a position on the issue of the question. Is my assessment of your thought process in the ballpark? Being concerned with and addressing an issue doesn't require the author to take sides and/or state/take/imply an opinion on answers to the question, only that the author at least focused on evaluating the topic the question is about/explored relevant things helpful for trying to figuring out an answer to the question.

Yeah that was it. I definitely misread the stem as one of those "both passages answer which one of the following" questions. That also explains why D is wrong, because neither passage is really "concerned with" that issue, even though they both answer it.

I also now think that paragraph 3 of passage B definitely shows the author is "concerned with" the fairness of flat taxes, that's why they ask their hypothetical question in lines 50-54.

Thanks for your help!

[manu92]

Hey guys . Im not fully satisfied with your explanations to this question. I really think D is a solid answer, and even more solid than C.
First, the word concerned doesn't really do anything to choice D. Both authors clearly answer the question and they do not answer it in a "btw" or detail oriented manner. Passage A makes it the whole point of the last paragraph because it argues that those objections that apply to progressive taxes do not apply to flat taxes with threshold. It is not a sideway issue in any way, because the main objective of the passage is evaluating the flat taxes and how they compare with the progressive taxes. In passage B, it is clearly mentioned as a central point that the whole passage is designed to answer.
Second, if the question were really asking what you guys are saying it should have said "mainly concerned" or "what is the main question that both passages should have answered". But it doesn't. In this scenario, the fact that both authors mention possible objections is sufficient to establish that they are indeed concerned with describing some of the objections. Otherwise, just why would they have included it in the passage. In both passages, the objections serve a purpose and one does not need to establish that it is the main one. Really, I do not know how much more I have to explain this point. Unless you have a gun to your head and someone is telling you to include something, in real life, if you say something then you are concerned with saying it.
But even if you're feeling like structuring it as a "main point" question (even if there's no way of knowing it), option C is actually worse in this respect than option D. Passage A in no way addresses the issue of how fair are progressive taxes to all tax payers. Granted, it does say that they give higher incentives and opportunities for avoiding taxes to higher income payers but that does not answer the question of whether progressive taxes can be fair to all payers. It implies that flat taxes can be more fair than progrssive ones but that's it.
Seriously, this question is a scandal. Just try to think of it without your "lsat is perfect" bubble that you tutors usually have and do something to make this test better cause a lot of people are getting screwed with this.

[180kickflip]

I basically agree with this^ Saying that both passages can answer a question and not actually be concerned with that question is ridiculous. If you address something in any way I think it's reasonable to say you are concerned with it.