Coherent solutions for the problem of

Answer choices

1. A

   Out of Scope20% picked this

   showing that shifting costs onto the patient contradicts the premise of

   Out of Scope: reimbursement Too Strong: contradicts The passage never talks about health-care reimbursement. The clause "show that X contradicts Y" is a pretty strong idea. The author never showed that one thing contradicted another.

   20%
2. B

   Out of Scope: fraudulent intent1% picked this

   attributing without justification fraudulent intent to

   Nothing in the passage matches up with "fraudulent intent". The author thinks that health-care providers and insurers have economic interests, so if possible they will shift any cost away from themselves and towards some other party. That doesn't mean that the author is accusing any of them of committing fraud.

   1%
3. C

   Correct66% picked this

   employing an analogy to characterize

   Why this is right

   "Analogy" is a super common answer on Method, so it's worth considering an answer like this. Although it's easy to forget and not a crucial part of the argument, the author does employ an analogy: push in on one part of this pliable spending balloon and an equally expensive bulge pops up elsewhere. The health care system is not literally a balloon. So this is a metaphor. It actually seems more appropriate to call it a metaphor than an analogy, but we can make it work. An analogy is just two separate cases that are believed to have some relevant similarity. Both a balloon and our current piecemeal system of paying for healthcare are believed to have the similarity that if you push in on one part, then it just makes some other part bulge out commensurately.

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

   66%
4. D

   Too Strong: denying possibility / disparaging each9% picked this

   denying the possibility of a solution by disparaging each possible

   The author doesn't deny the possibility of a solution to the problem of reducing health-care costs (she seems to be implying that we need a holistic, single-payer overhaul of the system). And she doesn't disparage each possible alternative system. She never even mentions any alternative systems. This answer is an example of the Ruling Out Options type of answer on Method.

   9%
5. E

   Out of Scope: cooperation is feasible3% picked this

   demonstrating that cooperation is feasible by citing

   This is tempting because "cite an instance" is the same as "provide an example", which is what we were guessing the answer would say. But the example isn't there to demonstrate that cooperation is feasible. The example is there to demonstrate that when you make a cut to one part of health-care costs, you get an uptick in some other health-care cost.

   3%