medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
Recent data shows that countries with the highest levels of corporate taxation also have the most robust social safety nets. Some economists argue that high corporate taxes provide the revenue needed for these programs. However, it is just as likely that a strong social safety net creates a stable environment that allows high corporate tax rates to be sustained without driving away business.
The argument's primary purpose is to
- suggest that an observed correlation may run in the causal direction opposite to the one first proposed
- show that two phenomena once thought related are in fact entirely independent
- argue that high corporate taxes are the principal cause of social stability
- cast doubt on the factual accuracy of the data the economists rely on
- establish that strong safety nets are impossible without high corporate taxes
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from the statements above?
- The question type just described is best identified as which one of the following?
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship the statement establ
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- Which one of the following must be true given the statement above?