Logical Reasoning

PT13 · S2 · Q7 It is not correct that the people

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning 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

It is not correct that the people of the United States, relative to comparable countries, are the most lightly taxed.

Conclusion

It is not correct that people of the United States are the most lightly taxed of comparable countries.

Evidence

Although the U.S. has the lowest tax-as-percent-of-GDP among Western industrialized countries, Americans pay out of pocket for goods/services that other countries provide via tax revenues. Health care is an example: U.S. private health spending is about 7% of GDP. The argument then says "this 7 percent, then, amounts to a tax."

Evaluate

The gripe we're supposed to have with this argument is with the last sentence. What do you mean the money we privately spend on our healthcare is a tax?

A tax, by ordinary definition, is a compulsory payment to a government. Private health-care spending is not paid to a government and is not legally compelled in the same way.

If other countries provide housing for their citizens, does that mean that money we in the U.S. spend on rent/mortgage is a tax?

Of course not. Our rent is a payment to the landlord. Our medical expenditures are payments to a doctor or insurance company or to CVS for our prescriptions. A tax is a payment to the government.

Goal

Find an answer that names the move of stretching the term "tax" beyond its proper application.

7.

The argument concerning whether the people of the United States are the most lightly taxed is most vulnerable to which one of the following criticisms?

  1. It bases a comparison on

    Bad Description

    The argument does use percentages of GDP, rather than raw numbers, but using percentages isn't objectionable here. We could use raw numbers, but it would make the same point. The author is just trying to say that the money we spend on health care (whether expressed as a percent of GDP or expressed in raw dollars) counts as part of the tax we pay in the U.S.

    16% picked this

  2. Correct

    It unreasonably extends the application

    Why this is right

    The argument takes the word "tax", which ordinarily refers to a compulsory payment to a government, and extends it to private health-care spending, which is neither a payment to government nor compulsory in the same sense. The author does not get to count money we spend as "taxes", when comparing how heavily taxed the U.S. is to other countries. This is basically an Equivocation flaw, because the concept of "tax" has changed drastically from what the beginning of the paragraph is talking about to what the end is talking about.

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

    62% picked this

  3. It uses negatively charged language

    Inappropriate Appeals

    Does it? I don't see negatively charged language anywhere. This answer refers to a famous flaw known as Inappropriate Appeals, where an author's argument would lean on emotion / anger / fear instead of actual reasons.

    1% picked this

  4. It generalizes from only a

    Sampling

    This refers to the famous Sampling flaw. The author's evidence looks at one specific instance, health care spending. Does she generalize that because health care spending is 7% of the U.S.'s GDP, it's around 7% of other nations' GDP? No. There isn't any sample --> extrapolation move in this argument. The author is citing health care to say that we can't just look at tax rates, when we're trying to assess which country is the most lightly taxed. She isn't ever arguing, "since these instances were X, this broader group of instances will also be X".

    8% picked this

  5. It sets up a dichotomy

    Bad Description

    The argument doesn't set up a false either/or between non-exclusive options. This is a variation of the famous flaw known as False Choice, when an author makes it seem like there are only two options. This answer is saying the author was acting like it can only be X or be Y, when in reality there's a third option, both X and Y. We can't match this up with any part of the conversation about taxes.

    13% 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