LR Question 7 Explanation
QUESTION TEXT: Passenger volume in the airline industry has declined…
QUESTION TYPE: Strengthen/Paradox
FACTS: Airports are expanding their passenger terminal facilities. Yet air traffic is down and won’t be up for at least five years. Airport expansion is a good idea only when traffic is increasing.
ANALYSIS: We need to show a benefit from expansion. Most of the wrong answers actually weaken the idea that expansion is smart.
___________
- This is actually irrelevant: we’re only told that traffic is declining. The economy isn’t mentioned. In any case a declining economy would make it even dumber to expand, since it would increase the costs of financing.
- CORRECT. It’s currently the most convenient time to expand. And by the time the expansions are done traffic may start to increase again.
- Presumably this will cause fewer people to travel. It weakens the argument for expansion.
- If airlines don’t need new capacity then it isn’t clear why they should expand.
- A decline in passenger travel doesn’t help us conclude that airports should expand.
More Resources for Strengthen Questions
- Intro Course lesson: This intro course lesson covers Strengthen questions.
- Mastery Seminar lesson: This LR Mastery seminar lesson covers strengthen questions.
I felt as though this wasn’t a great question. While (B) is a benefit to expanding now, it doesn’t really explain why it’s okay or resolve a discrepancy or whatever.
If expansion can be warranted “ONLY by increases in air traffic volume” and the stimulus says that air traffic is probably/maybe going to go up again in several years…how does this provide a reason in favour of the timing?
(B) feels like a wrong answer choice for a justify the principle question. And a wrong answer to a paradox question for that matter: it addresses PART of the paradox (why we should expand now) but doesn’t touch on the fact that it’s only warranted when there are increases in air traffic volume.
Is this saying that it’s ALWAYS okay to expand because air traffic volume is eventually going to increase? Or is the question treating everything else as context and simply asking for any reason to expand whenever you feel like it?
I definitely see how (B) provides the best reason in favour of the timing, but it still doesn’t feel “right.” Would something like this show up on the modern test? Am I missing something obvious?
We have two seemingly contradictory facts:
1) Airport expansion can be warranted only by increases in air traffic volume & it will probably be at least 5 years before passenger volume returns to a normal level or increases
2) Airports are expanding their passenger terminal facilities now.
All we need to do is find a way to explain why airports would expand these facilities now when it seems contrary to what we know about trends in passenger volume. (B) gives a good reason as to why the timing is good — convenience. We know that passenger volume will likely eventually increase, so why not prepare for it now when you can keep inconvenience to the public to a minimum.
Is is just me or is answer D) poorly worded? I’ve encountered this question twice now over a large span of time, and both times I answered D), thinking that it meant that the proposed expansions would allow airlines to absorb the initial increase in traffic, i.e. they are expanding now because they know they will need it in the near future. It could be made more clear that this references the current capacity of the airlines without the proposed expansions, and thus the expansions are not really necessary.
(D) is suggesting that even without the expansion, airlines can initially absorb the increase in passenger volume. If anything, (D) would give airlines even less of a reason to start building an expansion 5 years before any potential increase in passenger volume. So, it definitely doesn’t explain why the expansion is being built now.