Unplugged Practice Test: Logical Reasoning Set 2, Question 22 (Resolve the Paradox)
Taking the test? Finish it first. This page shows the answer.
- These questions ask which fact best explains an apparent conflict.
- Predict what a correct answer needs to do before you read the choices.
- Every question on this test is original, written to the same logical skeletons as real questions, and Steve checked every one himself before release.
The question
Economists have built a model of how steep rent increases would affect the bookshops of Verrick, a city with an unusually dense retail core. The model indicates that if commercial rents there rose by 20 percent, a substantial share of the city's bookshops would go out of business. Yet the same model reports that under exactly those conditions the total selling floor operated by the city's bookshops would grow rather than contract.
22. Which one of the following, if true, best accounts for the discrepancy in the model's results?
- (A)Rent increases of that size would lead Verrick to grant bookshops a tax rebate, and the rebate would keep the total selling floor from contracting.
- (B)As rents rise, the gap between what a bookshop earns on a square foot of selling floor and what it pays for that square foot widens, and a wider gap closes shops faster.
- (C)Rent increases of that size would push more of Verrick's book buying into its outer neighborhoods, narrowing the difference between the busiest and the quietest shopping streets.
- (D)Rent increases of that size would prompt landlords to offer discounted long leases to the shops that stayed open, and those shops would take on more selling floor each year than the closing shops gave up.
- (E)Rent increases of that size would thin Verrick's supply of vacant storefronts, and a thinner supply raises the rent at which a bookshop's owners decide to close.
DWhy (D) is correct
A 20 percent rent rise would close a substantial share of Verrick's bookshops, yet the same model has the city's total bookshop selling floor growing rather than shrinking. The right choice explains how floor space can grow even while shops close. (D) does that: landlords offer discounted long leases to the shops that stay open, and those survivors take on more floor each year than the closing shops give up, so the total climbs even with fewer bookshops standing.
Why the other answers are wrong
AWhy (A) is wrong
(A) offers a tax rebate that merely keeps total floor from contracting, which at best holds the line and never explains actual growth.
BWhy (B) is wrong
(B) has the earnings-to-rent gap widening and closing shops faster, which deepens the puzzle by predicting more closures, not more floor space.
CWhy (C) is wrong
(C) shifts buying to outer neighborhoods and narrows street differences, a change in where books get bought rather than in how much selling floor exists citywide.
EWhy (E) is wrong
(E) has vacant storefronts thin out and raise the rent at which owners quit, which doesn't touch why the surviving floor space would expand.
Common questions
What type of question is this?
Resolve the Paradox. These questions ask which fact best explains an apparent conflict.
How do I get better at Resolve the Paradox questions?
Predict the answer before reading the choices. The free LSAT cheat sheet lists the wrong-answer patterns to watch for on every type.
