Columnist: Raising the minimum wage

Answer choices

1. A

   Irrelevant Relationship2% picked this

   Workers who earn more than the minimum wage would not also be hurt by increased prices

   We don't need anything to be true of workers who earn more than minium wage to reach our conclusion about minimum wage workers.

   2%
2. B

   Negation3% picked this

   Any increase to the minimum wage smaller than the one proposed would not substantially affect prices

   For one thing, we don't need anything to be true of smaller wage hikes than the one proposed. You could say that those hypothetical smaller hikes are out of scope. But digging deeper, this is actually a classic LSAT Negation trap. If the premise tells you X --> Y, you don't need to assume ~X --> ~Y.

   3%
3. C

   Correct91% picked this

   The proposed minimum-wage increase would not wholly compensate low-income workers for the resulting increase in prices

   Why this is right

   This matches our prediction. If we didn't predict this, we should still be drawn to the lovable language of ruling out: not wholly compensate. Not only is this common in Necessary Assumption correct answers, it's also very easy to subject to the Negation Test. What would happen to this argument if the wage increases did wholly compensate workers for the price hikes? That would destory the argument, preventing us from concluding that the wage increases would hurt rather than help. If the answer, negated, ruins the argument, it's correct.

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

   91%
4. D

   Irrelevant Relationship1% picked this

   If raising the minimum wage helped low-income workers, this would be a good reason

   We're not concerned with what does or doesn't justify a wage raise. We're concerned with analyzing the impact of a wage raise.

   1%
5. E

   Inference Bait3% picked this

   Changes in the minimum wage are generally not as beneficial to the economy as

   We might walk away from this argument thinking "well if that's true, I guess raising minimum wage isn't that great for the economy afterall." But something you might infer from the text is not the same as something the text assumes. We don't need this to be true in order for the argument to work. The introduction of the idea of "belief" is a big red flag. Answers about intent, knowledge or belief are almost never correct unless the stimulus itself explicilty deals with the concept, too.

   3%