Q19

[hippo3717]

I thought this question was hard...

Now I know the answer, line 14 - 25 supports answer C.
However, I would not have anticipated it...

Please help! How could have one thought of C as the answer?

[ohthatpatrick]

I think we might predict or be intuitively drawn to this answer if, when we read the passage, we saw it as a fundamental debate between two schools of thought:
neoclassical economics
&
steady-state economics

You might be thinking to yourself, "OF COURSE I knew it was neoclassical vs. steady state."

It's not enough, of course, to just know that these are the names of the opposing sides. We gotta figure out a simple, easy way of remembering what the difference is between them.

Here's what I probably would have retained/reinforced/remembered after my first read:
neoclassical = no external limits on an economy (line 7) ... perpetual growth is the solution to economic problems
vs.
steady-state = nature sets an external limit to an economy ... perpetual growth would be unsustainable and would turn into an economic problem

So when Q19 asks me what steady-state thought was a noneconomic constraint, I would reread line 7 to understand the context ... "Oh, right. Neoclassicists think that the economy is a closed system with no external constraints. Steady-staters thought there WAS an external (noneconomic) constraint: nature."

So I would want the answer choice to reinforce nature's finite budget of resources.

And, scanning for that, naturally, I would find (C).

I got the impression from the tone of your question that you thought this detail was a "needle in a haystack" detail, i.e. really obscure and not important to the big picture.

But this actually is the big picture. This is the fundamental way that steady-state differs from neoclassical.

I think this question is hard mainly because the wording of the question stem doesn't make it obvious that they're asking, "What's the difference between steady-state and neoclassical?"

We have to see that 'constraint' in line 7 refers to the big picture question of "Is an economy unlimited, as the neoclassicists believe, or limited, as the steady-staters believe."

Hope this helps.

[deedubbew]

Why not B?

[ohthatpatrick]

The index of environmentally sustainable growth is a warning sign that our actual growth is environmentally sustainable. Although this warning sign is suggesting to us that we've exceeded our limits, the index itself is just a measurement tool, a warning sign, not a limit.

The keyword in the question stem is "noneconomic constraint".

Whichever answer choice we pick needs to come from a line reference that includes "noneconomic constraint" or some equivalent paraphrase.

From line 7-8, we see "no noneconomic constraints" and "no limits on growth" going hand in hand.

And then in line 19-26, we see "nature's limited capacity to regenerate raw material and absorb waste suggests ... that growth beyond this ideal point would ... impoverish rather than enrich".

Line 7-8 vs. line 19-26 is the essence of the debate between Neoclassical (no limits) and Steady State (oh, there are limits, my friend).

So we can support (C) because the capacity of nature to absorb waste is a LIMIT on growth, and SS believes that finite environmental resources are EXTERNAL to an economic system, not internal.


== incorrect answers ==

(A) this is an economic constraint ... in lines 48-49 we see that both Neo and SS agree that this is a required goal an economy must meet.

(B) this is economic (it factors in production costs) and is NOT a constraint ... it's just a measurement tool that SS sees as a warning that we've exceeded our budget.

(D) Do problems associated with economic growth LIMIT economic growth? i.e., are they a constraint? There's not a good line reference in the passage for saying so, but it seems reasonable to think that the problems that arise with growth might limit growth. However, those problems would be an economic constraint, because they are a direct consequence of economic growth.

(E) You could shoot this down in a similar manner to how we eliminated (D). However, the easier way to get rid of this answer is to remember that this phrase came out of the mouths of Neo's ... this question is from the viewpoint of SS. So this reeks of "wrong point of view".