\
  The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
BackRefresh Options Favorite

LSAT Challenge - Explain why the wrong choices are wrong

Adjusted for inflation, the income earned from wool sales ...
Chrome French Garrison Party Of The First Part
  04/23/17
i think C is correct The conditions in A could explain this...
narrow-minded exhilarant lodge
  04/23/17
E
violent brilliant property digit ratio
  04/23/17
i don't think it's E, C is much more specific "(C) ...
narrow-minded exhilarant lodge
  04/23/17
"Adjusted for inflation, the income earned from wool sa...
violent brilliant property digit ratio
  04/23/17
right, but C says that the family, which is included in the ...
narrow-minded exhilarant lodge
  04/23/17
Wool sales does not encompass the entire revenue stream of s...
pearly stubborn masturbator
  04/23/17
No. The standard of living does not just include sheep farme...
pearly stubborn masturbator
  04/23/17
LSAT authors are non-zero sum thinkers.
mildly autistic jewess
  04/23/17
C is the answer. The question assumes that adjusted for infl...
zombie-like racy round eye half-breed
  04/23/17
Agree completely and the only thing I can say after reading...
grizzly fragrant idea he suggested center
  04/23/17
clearly c
Green halford
  04/23/17


Poast new message in this thread



Reply Favorite

Date: April 23rd, 2017 12:07 PM
Author: Chrome French Garrison Party Of The First Part

Adjusted for inflation, the income earned from wool sales

by a certain family of Australian sheep farmers grew

substantially during the period from 1840 to 1860. This is

because the price for wool sold on the international market

was higher than the price paid on domestic markets and

the percentage and amount of its wool that this family sold

internationally increased dramatically during that period.

But even though the family generated more income from

selling their wool, they failed to enjoy a commensurate

increase in prosperity.

Which one of the following would, if true, help most to

resolve the apparent paradox described above?

(A)

At the end of the 1800s, prices in general in Australia

rose more rapidly than did the wholesale price of

wool sold domestically.

(B)

The prices of wool sold to domestic markets by

Australian sheep farmers decreased dramatically

during the period in question.

(C)

The international and domestic prices for mutton,

sheepskins, and certain other products produced by

all Australian sheep farmers fell sharply during the

period in question.

(D)

Competition in wool sales increased during the

period in question, leaving Australian wool

producers in a less favorable position than

previously.

(E)

Among Australian sheep farmers, the percentage

who made their living exclusively from international

wool sales increased significantly during the period

in question.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3593026&forum_id=2#33141277)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 23rd, 2017 12:16 PM
Author: narrow-minded exhilarant lodge

i think C is correct

The conditions in A could explain this, but the time period in the answer refers to the "end of the 1800s" while the time period in the passage refers to the time period between 1840 and 1860

B is wrong because the passage states that the income earned from selling wool has increased substantially, meaning that international sales have more than offset the losses in domestic sales

D is wrong because the passage states that the income earned from selling wool has increased - even if the market is more competitive, they are still making more money.

in E, the passage refers to a "certain family"

i might be wrong though

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3593026&forum_id=2#33141338)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 23rd, 2017 12:20 PM
Author: violent brilliant property digit ratio

E

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3593026&forum_id=2#33141363)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 23rd, 2017 12:23 PM
Author: narrow-minded exhilarant lodge

i don't think it's E, C is much more specific

"(C)

The international and domestic prices for mutton,

sheepskins, and certain other products produced by

///ALL/// Australian sheep farmers fell sharply during the

period in question. "

"(E)

Among Australian sheep farmers, ///THE PERCENTAGE///

who made their living exclusively from international

wool sales increased significantly during the period

in question."

C seems to specify that every Australian sheep farmer took a big hit, while E suggests that it's somewhat likely that the family took a hit

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3593026&forum_id=2#33141383)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 23rd, 2017 12:25 PM
Author: violent brilliant property digit ratio

"Adjusted for inflation, the income earned from wool sales

by a certain family of Australian sheep farmers grew

substantially"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3593026&forum_id=2#33141403)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 23rd, 2017 12:28 PM
Author: narrow-minded exhilarant lodge

right, but C says that the family, which is included in the group "all Australian Sheep Farmers", took a big hit in revenue for sure due to decreases in revenue in non-wool sheep products

E says that the percentage of sheep farmers who now only sell wool has increased, but does not necessarily include the family in question, while C does

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3593026&forum_id=2#33141423)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 23rd, 2017 12:29 PM
Author: pearly stubborn masturbator

Wool sales does not encompass the entire revenue stream of sheep farmers.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3593026&forum_id=2#33141427)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 23rd, 2017 12:24 PM
Author: pearly stubborn masturbator

No. The standard of living does not just include sheep farmers, and those that made their living exclusively from international sales is irrelevant, it is simply describing what was likely to happen if international prices increased. Just because it is logical does not mean it answers the question of why this certain family did not enjoy a higher standard of living.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3593026&forum_id=2#33141389)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 23rd, 2017 12:32 PM
Author: mildly autistic jewess

LSAT authors are non-zero sum thinkers.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3593026&forum_id=2#33141437)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 23rd, 2017 12:35 PM
Author: zombie-like racy round eye half-breed

C is the answer. The question assumes that adjusted for inflation, income from wool sales increased. So it doesnt matter if A, B or D are true, the facts in the question already assume that these factors haven't affected the family in question. E is also irrelevant. However, if C is true, and if a substantial portion of income for sheep farmers is from non-wool products, it explains the so-called paradox

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3593026&forum_id=2#33141457)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 23rd, 2017 12:40 PM
Author: grizzly fragrant idea he suggested center

Agree completely and the only thing I can say after reading this thread is "(xo2017)"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3593026&forum_id=2#33141487)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 23rd, 2017 12:45 PM
Author: Green halford

clearly c

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3593026&forum_id=2#33141517)