Question 55·Easy·Cross-Text Connections
Text 1
Labor economist Mira Patel examined wage data in several U.S. cities that recently increased their minimum wage. She concludes that higher minimum wages raise the annual earnings of low-income workers because the hourly pay increase is larger than any small reductions in hours that might occur. Patel argues that this demonstrates the policy is an effective way to combat poverty.
Text 2
Urban policy analyst Carlos Romero reviewed employment records from the same cities. He notes that after the minimum wage hikes, many employers cut workers’ weekly hours and scheduled them for fewer shifts. Romero contends that, once these lost hours are accounted for, the typical low-wage employee earns about the same—or even less—over the course of a year than before the wage increase.
Based on the texts, how would Romero (Text 2) most likely respond to Patel’s conclusion in Text 1?
For cross-text questions, quickly summarize each text in a few words (e.g., Text 1: “wage hike helps, earnings up”; Text 2: “hours cut, earnings same/down”). Then reread the question stem to see whether you’re looking for agreement, disagreement, or refinement. Eliminate answer choices that introduce new topics (like inflation, business size, national data) that neither text mentions. Finally, pick the choice that most directly expresses how the second author’s evidence or reasoning challenges or qualifies the first author’s main conclusion, using only information both texts actually discuss.
Hints
Clarify Patel’s main conclusion
Focus on the sentence in Text 1 where Patel states what higher minimum wages do to annual earnings and why she believes the policy is effective.
Clarify what Romero finds
Look at what Romero says happens to workers’ weekly hours and shifts after the wage increase and how that affects what they earn over a year.
Compare the two viewpoints
Ask yourself: Does Romero agree that annual earnings go up, or does his evidence suggest something different? Which choice captures that specific disagreement about yearly income, without adding new topics that neither text mentions?
Step-by-step Explanation
Understand Patel’s conclusion in Text 1
Patel looks at cities that raised the minimum wage and concludes that this policy raises the annual earnings of low-income workers. Her reasoning is that the increase in hourly pay is bigger than any small cuts in hours, so overall yearly income goes up. She then says this proves the policy is an effective way to reduce poverty.
Understand Romero’s claim in Text 2
Romero studies the same cities but focuses on what happened to workers’ hours. He notes that many employers cut weekly hours and shifts after the wage hike. When he factors in these lost hours, he finds that the typical low-wage worker earns about the same or even less per year than before.
Determine how Romero would respond to Patel
Patel says annual earnings go up because higher pay per hour outweighs small hour cuts. Romero, however, finds that the hour cuts are large enough that yearly income often does not increase and can even fall. So Romero would disagree with Patel’s conclusion that higher minimum wages clearly raise low-income workers’ annual earnings and effectively fight poverty.
Match Romero’s response to the answer choice
You need the option that shows Romero arguing that reduced hours can cancel out the higher hourly wage, so that annual earnings don’t necessarily rise. Choice C best captures this: it states that reductions in work hours can offset the higher hourly pay, meaning raising the minimum wage does not necessarily increase low-income workers’ annual earnings.