Rapid population growth can be

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsStrengthen

Keep going in LSAT Lab

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

Free to start

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

Rapid population growth can be disastrous for a small city. Ideally there should be at least one municipal employee for every hundred residents; when too many people move in at once, city services responsible for utilities and permits are allow for the immediate hiring of new staff.

What this question is testing

Strengthen

Your task

Find the choice that makes the argument's conclusion more likely to be true.

Common trap

Answers that are consistent with the argument but add no real support, or that strengthen a claim the argument doesn't make.

Winning move

Locate the gap between evidence and conclusion, then pick the choice that closes it.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question

26.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens

Answer choices

Weakens (if anything)16% picked this
During budget shortages, small cities tend to place a high priority on basic municipal services while cutting back
This discusses cities prioritizing basic municipal services during budget shortages, suggesting that during an influx of new residents, the city would cut back on less essential services and make sure they had the municipal services (that would be needed to absorb these new residents). That would only weaken the claim of disaster due to population influx.
16%
Unclear Impact2% picked this
New residents of any city bring with them new ideas about how a city
This suggests new residents bring new ideas on city management. Its impact is unclear without knowing if these ideas are beneficial or detrimental to city operations during a population surge.
2%
Irrelevant Comparison9% picked this
Some large cities can absorb rapid population growth more readily than many
This references large cities, which are not the focus of the argument concerning small cities facing rapid growth, and doesn't provide insight into the consequences of such growth.
9%
No Impact2% picked this
A low unemployment rate is one of the main reasons that new residents move
This states that low unemployment is a reason for moving to the city but doesn't address the effects of increased population or directly influence the argument about city service overloads. We might even argue that this weakens, by making it seem like the city is in pretty good shape, at the time it gets a surge of residents (it would be much harder to deal with new residents if city services were already stretched thin due to lots of unemployed people).
2%
Correct71% picked this
New residents of most small cities do not start paying city taxes for at
Why this is right
This states that new residents won't start paying city taxes for at least a year, meaning the city's budget won't immediately benefit from new revenue to hire additional staff. It reinforces the idea that the city will have to allocate resources to this influx of residents, but won't have any new resources in its budget for at least a year.
Skill tested: Strengthen · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
71%

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