Loading...
Columnist: If governments really did get serious about slowing global warming, they would have to eliminate subsidies for fossil fuel production, since use of these fuels is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. However, legislators would then need the courage to resist industry pressure, as the oil, coal, and natural gas industries would certainly protest any reduction in the subsidies, in order to maintain their profitability.
Which of the following is the main point of the columnist's argument?
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
| If governments really did get serious about slowing global warming, they would have to eliminate subsidies for fossil fuel production, since use of these fuels is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. |
|
| However, legislators would then need the courage to resist industry pressure, as the oil, coal, and natural gas industries would certainly protest any reduction in the subsidies, in order to maintain their profitability. |
|
The columnist starts with what governments would need to do for serious climate action (eliminate fossil fuel subsidies), then immediately points out why this would be politically difficult (industry pushback). The argument moves from the technical requirement to the political reality.
Getting serious about slowing global warming would require political courage from legislators to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies despite inevitable industry resistance.
The argument uses a conditional structure: IF governments want serious climate action, THEN they must eliminate subsidies, BUT this requires political courage because industries will fight back. The conclusion combines both the necessity (what must be done) and the challenge (what makes it difficult).
Main Point - This is asking us to identify the central message or conclusion the columnist is trying to convey in their entire argument.
The argument makes conditional claims about what governments would need to do (eliminate subsidies) and what obstacles they'd face (industry pressure requiring political courage).
For main point questions, we need to step back and see the big picture. The columnist isn't just listing facts - they're making a broader point about the political reality of climate action. We should look for what overarching message connects both parts of the argument: the conditional requirement (eliminating subsidies) and the political obstacle (industry resistance).