Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: A company pays double for gas in its current city compared to another city and will move if that gap gets any wider. The economist claims that if the current city's price goes up even a little, the company will definitely move.

Conclusion: Any increase in the price of natural gas in Chester will cause ChesChem to relocate its operations to Tilsen.

Reasoning: ChesChem currently pays twice as much for gas in Chester as in Tilsen and has a policy to move if the cost in Chester becomes more than twice the cost in Tilsen.

Analysis: The economist is making a big leap by assuming that the price in Tilsen will stay the same. If the price in Chester goes up, but the price in Tilsen also goes up by the same amount, the 'more than twice' threshold might never be crossed. To make this argument work, we need to assume that the price in Tilsen won't increase enough to keep the ratio at 2:1 or less. Look for an answer that stabilizes the price in Tilsen.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

7.

The economist's argument requires assuming that

Correct Answer
B
If the Tilsen price will not increase, then any increase in Chester from the current 2T level makes C > 2T, triggering the move. Negation test: if Tilsen’s price does increase, a small increase in Chester may leave C ≤ 2T, so the conclusion (any increase in Chester ensures a move) would not hold.
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