Reading Comprehension

PT109 · S2 · P1 · Q6 Per-Capita GNP

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Many political economists believe that the soundest indicator of the economic health of a nation is the nation’s gross national product (GNP) per capita—a figure reached by dividing the total value of the goods produced yearly in a nation by its population and taken to be a measure of the welfare of the nation’s residents.

Topic / Purpose

Measuring economic health / Problem-Solution

Main Point

Human indicators are a better metric than is GNP to measure the welfare of a nation's residents.

Passage Map

P1 - Intro of GNP as one method. Author's thesis that human indicators is better method. P2 - Brief defense of GNP by its proponents, followed by author's reasons that GNP is not a great metric. P3 - Real world examples of countries going with human indicators instead.

Other Commentary

This passage's big picture can be surmised in the first two sentences. We hear the classic 1-2-punch of "many (other) people believe ____ " followed by the Author's Pivot, with a But / Yet / However / Recently.

We could have also construed this passage with other frameworks: Answer a Question - How should we measure economic health? Human indicators. Present a Debate - People are debating how to measure economic health, and our author is on the side of "human indicators".

6.

Based on the passage, the political economists discussed in the passage would be most likely to agree with which one of the following statements?

  1. Correct

    A change in a nation’s

    Why this is right

    This sounds like the first sentence of the 2nd paragraph. Improved GNP leads to improved human indicators.

    Skill tested: Non-Author Opinion · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

    69% picked this

  2. The level of human indicators

    Opposite Too Strong: irrelevant

    The first sentence of the 2nd paragraph makes it seem like the economists understand the importance (the relevance) of human indicators; they just think that raising GNP is the way to improve them.

    6% picked this

  3. A high per capita GNP

    Too Strong: usually Opposite

    Since these economists love their GNP and think it's the soundest measure, a high GNP means a healthy nation. According to this answer, high GNP also means "poorly distributed wealth", so the economists would have to think that "poorly distributed wealth" was a sign of a healthy nation. We don't have any support for them having that counterintuitive position.

    3% picked this

  4. The welfare of a nation’s

    Too Strong: irrelevant

    They don't think welfare is irrelevant; they think GNP is a good indicator of economic health and eventually it leads to better welfare in terms of human indicators.

    5% picked this

  5. The use of indicators other

    Opposite

    This is the author's position: we should be using human indicators, not GNP as our sole indicator. But these economists are cool with just using GNP.

    16% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free