Reading Comprehension

PT126 · S2 · P4 · Q24 Speculative Bubble and Tulip Prices

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

In economics, the term "speculative bubble" refers to a large upward move in an asset's price driven not by the asset's fundamentals—that is, by the earnings derivable from the asset—but rather by mere speculation that someone else will be willing to pay a higher price for it.

Topic

Whether the tulip market is an example of a speculative bubble

Framework

Challenge a Position

Position - Mackay believes that he Dutch tulip market is an example, since the price of some bulbs skyrocketed suddenly and ultimately fell to a tiny, tiny fraction of that peak perceived value.

Challenge - Garber is saying that even though there was a rapid escalation in price followed by a dramatic decline, that's actually just how the true economic cycle of tulip bulbs work (early ones are so much more valuable than later ones, that it's normal and rational, i.e. based on the fundamental value of the asset, that prices soared and then declined as they did.

Main Point

Barber thinks that the depiction of the Dutch tulip market, by Mackay and others, as a speculative bubble is wrong.

Summary

P1 - Definition of Speculative Bubble, followed by the Position and the Challenge.

The first few ideas are just warming us up to what speculative bubbles are. Then we zoom in on one specific situation, which is often though to be an example of a speculative bubble. The transition from "According to X ..." to "But the economist Y challenges this position" looks like our Purpose Pivot in the final sentence of the first paragraph, suggesting that Garber's challenge is going to be the main point of the passage.

P2 - The Position being Challenged

This paragraph outlines Mackay's account of how the Dutch tulip market behaved liked the definition of a speculative bubble.

P3 - The Challenge to the Position

This paragraph covers Garber's rebuttal, saying that the typical value pattern for tulip bulbs may resemble a speculative bubble, but it is actually just a symptom of correct, rational economic thinking about the value of a tulip bulb at different stages in time. The author doesn't really show up in this passage. Because Garber is given the last word, we can assume our author is sympathetic to this rebuttal or implicitly agreeing with it, but we would mainly think of this as a neutral passage.

24.

The passage most strongly supports the inference that Garber would agree with which one of the following statements?

  1. If speculative bubbles occur at

    Too Strong: very rarely

    Garber is only saying that the Dutch tulip situation isn't an example of a speculative bubble. He's not saying that speculative bubbles almost never occur.

    1% picked this

  2. Correct

    Many of the owners of

    Why this is right

    This answer is essentially saying that Garber would have defended the people who bought these tulip bulbs at their original high-price. They weren't just being suckered by the hype of some 'bubble'. They were correctly analyzing the value of a tulip bulb. This is supported by Garber saying "this episode should not be described as a speculative bubble, for the eventual decline in bulb prices can be explained in terms of the fundamentals." And then at the end of the 3rd paragraph, Garber is saying "this does not mean that the high prices of original bulbs are irrational, for earnings derivable from the millions of bulbs descendent from the original bulbs can be very high ... given that an original bulb can generate a reasonable return on investment ..."

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

    62% picked this

  3. If there is not a

    Reversal

    Garber is thinking, Since buying an original tulip bulb at a crazy high price is not irrational (you could reasonably expect to make that money back), this was not a speculative bubble. High prices ? Not a speculative not irrational bubble But this answer gives us the reversed logic version of that: Not a speculative ? prices were not bubble irrational

    8% picked this

  4. Most people who invested in

    Too Strong: most / all

    Garber is only saying that the investment in an original tulip bulb, despite its high price, was rational given the earnings derivable from the millions of bulbs descendant from the original. He isn't vouching for all the investment decisions made by at least 51% of the people who invested in Dutch tulip bulbs.

    5% picked this

  5. Mackay mistakenly infers from the

    Wrong Mistake

    Garber is trying to argue that exorbitantly high prices of the original bulbs were not irrational. No one was arguing that the low prices were irrational. A speculative bubble is when the prices being paid for something go way beyond the actual value of that thing (like Gamestop stock, or bitcoin, or dogecoin, or real estate prior to the 2008 market crash, etc.) Mackay thought the Dutch tulip situation was a bubble where prices ballooned to artificially high prices before eventually settling back down to the low prices they should have had (the rational prices).

    23% 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