PrepTest 78, Section 2, Question 3
Flynn: Allowing people to collect large damage awards when they successfully sue corporations that produce dangerous products clearly benefits consumers, since the possibility of large awards gives corporations a strong incentive to reduce safety risks associated with their products.
Flynn: Allowing people to collect large damage awards when they successfully sue corporations that produce dangerous products clearly benefits consumers, since the possibility of large awards gives corporations a strong incentive to reduce safety risks associated with their products.
Garcia: Without sensible limits, damage awards can be so high that corporations are destroyed. As a result, employees lose their jobs and the productivity of the corporation is lost. This harms the economy and thus harms consumers.
Flynn: Allowing people to collect large damage awards when they successfully sue corporations that produce dangerous products clearly benefits consumers, since the possibility of large awards gives corporations a strong incentive to reduce safety risks associated with their products.
Garcia: Without sensible limits, damage awards can be so high that corporations are destroyed. As a result, employees lose their jobs and the productivity of the corporation is lost. This harms the economy and thus harms consumers.
Flynn: Allowing people to collect large damage awards when they successfully sue corporations that produce dangerous products clearly benefits consumers, since the possibility of large awards gives corporations a strong incentive to reduce safety risks associated with their products.
Garcia responds to Flynn's argument by
arguing that the policy supported in Flynn's argument could have undesirable consequences
providing evidence that undermines one of the premises of Flynn's argument
comparing Flynn's argument to an obviously flawed argument that has the same logical structure
contending that Flynn's argument could be used to support a policy that is inconsistent with the policy that Flynn advocates
providing an alternative explanation for a situation described in Flynn's argument
0 Comments