medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
Although implementing a sugar tax may disproportionately affect low-income individuals, it is the most effective way to reduce the consumption of unhealthy beverages. Reducing this consumption will likely lead to a decrease in obesity and diabetes rates. Given that the healthcare costs associated with these conditions are a significant burden on the public, the implementation of the sugar tax is a justifiable public health measure.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the argument?
- Putting a sugar tax in place is a defensible measure to take in the name of public health.
- Cutting consumption of unhealthy beverages is likely to lower rates of obesity and diabetes.
- The public bears a heavy financial burden from the healthcare costs of obesity and diabetes.
- A sugar tax is the single most effective tool for curbing consumption of unhealthy drinks.
- Because it works so well, a sugar tax should be adopted regardless of any burden on low-income groups.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- 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?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these premises?
- Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the authors' conclusion?
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- 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