ParadoxDiff: Easy

Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: Usually, when the government forces businesses to pay workers more, those businesses fire people to save money. However, in the fast-food world, where almost everyone makes the minimum wage, a recent pay raise didn't lead to any job cuts.

Reasoning: While companies typically reduce staff when minimum wage increases threaten profits, a recent minimum wage hike did not result in job losses in the fast-food industry, despite its high concentration of minimum-wage workers.

Analysis: This stimulus presents a classic paradox: a general economic rule failed to apply to the very industry where we would expect to see it most clearly. To resolve this, we need a piece of information that explains why fast-food companies didn't need to cut jobs despite the increased labor costs. Look for an answer that suggests these businesses found another way to cover the costs, such as by raising menu prices or because they were already operating with the absolute minimum number of staff required to function.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

8.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to explain why the increase in the minimum wage did not affect the number of jobs in the fast-food industry?

Correct Answer
A
A explains the offset: decreased turnover saved enough on recruiting costs to cover the wage increase, so profits weren’t reduced and there was no need to cut jobs.
Upgrade Your Prep

Ready to go beyond free explanations?

LSAT Perfection is the #1 modern LSAT prep platform, trusted by thousands of students for comprehensive test strategies, advanced drilling, and full analytics on every PrepTest.

Detailed explanations for 59 PrepTests
Advanced drillset builder
Personalized analytics
Built-in Wrong Answer Journal
Explore Perfection Plus for full LSAT prep