The consumer price index is

Answer choices

1. A

   Not an Objection7% picked this

   fails to consider the possibility that there are years in which there is no change in

   Since this begins with fails to consider / ignores the possibility, we can ask ourselves if this idea would hurt the author. It doesn't seem like there's any way to weaken the author by saying, "Hey, buddy, in some years, there's no change in the CPI." He would be like, "Sure. I never said it changes every year. I just said that sometimes government benefits are higher than they should be, because sometimes production costs are drastically reduced."

   7%
2. B

   Never a Flaw5% picked this

   fails to make explicit which goods and services are included in the

   Our objection to this author wasn't, "Hey, author --- if you're going to suggest that the CPI sometimes provides the wrong number for government benefits, then you'll need to explicitly list all the goods and services included in the CPI." LSAT is never asking us to complain that we didn't receive a precise number/measurement or a precise definition or the specific names of people alluded to, and so forth. We're supposed to be objecting to bad logic moves, not missing facts.

   5%
3. C

   Out of Scope: unusual goods5% picked this

   presumes, without providing warrant, that retirement benefits are not generally used to

   The argument doesn't specify whether the CPI only tracks "usual" retail goods or all retail goods. Does the author need to assume that more than 50% of retirement benefits are used to purchase usual goods? Would it hurt his argument if only 51% was used to purchase unusual and only 49% was used to purchase usual. Of course not, because the distinction between usual and unusual goods means nothing to this conversation.

   5%
4. D

   Bad Conclusion / Evidence Match4% picked this

   uncritically draws an inference from what has been true in the past to what will be

   This answer accuses the conclusion of being about what will be true in the future and the evidence of being what was true in the past. The conclusion isn't about the future. It's just saying "sometimes the value of benefits is greater than is warranted". And the evidence wasn't about any past circumstance. It was just a fact about one sort of thing the CPI doesn't track or consider.

   4%
5. E

   Correct78% picked this

   makes an irrelevant shift from discussing retail prices to discussing

   Why this is right

   This speaks to the Irrelevant Rebuttal we were looking for. Why does the author care if the CPI tracks when a company's production costs change? The CPI is only supposed to be measuring retail prices that consumers pay. If a change in production costs affects the retail price, then the CPI will detect it. And if the change in production costs doesn't affect the retail price, then who cares about the production cost? That has nothing to do with the CPI's job, which is only to measure the price tag at the store.

   Skill tested: Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   78%