medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
A government should fund a public project only if the project's benefits to society outweigh its costs. The proposed high-speed rail line would cost far less than the combined value of the commuting time it would save and the pollution it would prevent. The transit commissioner therefore concludes that the government should fund the rail line.
Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the commissioner's argument?
- The estimate of commuting time saved assumes ridership levels the line is unlikely ever to reach.
- The proposed line would be the fastest high-speed rail system in the country.
- Every public project whose benefits exceed its costs has proven overwhelmingly popular with voters.
- Most commuters surveyed say that high-speed trains are more comfortable than the buses they currently use.
- The rail line would impose no significant costs on society beyond those already reflected in the comparison.
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 these statements?
- 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?