Emily: This plan to issue bonds to raise money to repair the bridges o

Question

Emily:  This plan to issue bonds to raise money to repair the bridges over the river will waste a lot of money. The city insists on preserving the bridges’ historic character, but that will more than double the cost of the repairs. And the city will have to pay a huge amount of interest on the bonds. That makes this plan a very inefficient way to pay for these urgently needed repairs, so we should oppose it.

Juanita:  But the bridges really do need repairs to keep them safe enough to use. Thousands of cars cross the bridges every day, so the city cannot just close all the bridges for safety until it finds funding for the repairs. Despite the bond plan's flaws, we have to support it.

The two speakers disagree on how_______ 1 ______it would be to fund repairs of the bridges with the bond plan but agree on how______ 2 ______it is for repairs to be made.

https://gmatclub.com/forum/download/file.php?id=75379

Sajjad1994 · Accepted Answer

Official Explanation

RO1

The question asks about the speakers’ disagreement regarding the funding of the bridge repairs. Emily says that the plan will waste a lot of money and is inefficient. Juanita says that even though the bond plan is flawed, the city cannot just close the bridges until it finds funding for the repairs. Thus, Juanita believes the bond plan is prudent, while Emily believes it is not. Neither speaker discusses the likelihood that the bond issue will raise the needed funds, and thus there is no evidence that they disagree about how possible, unlikely, or difficult it would be to fund the repairs. As discussed in the analysis of RO2, both speakers believe repair of the bridges is urgent, so they do not disagree about the urgency of funding repairs.

The correct answer is prudent.

RO2

The question asks about the speakers’ agreement regarding the bridge repairs. Emily calls the repairs urgently needed, and Juanita says the bridges really do need repairs to be safe. Thus, both speakers agree that the repairs are urgent. Neither speaker considers the nature or difficulty of the repairs themselves, so there is no way to conclude that they agree about how possible, unlikely, prudent, or difficult the repairs will be.

The correct answer is urgent.

Apt0810 · Answer

The two speakers disagree on how PRUDENT it would be to fund repairs of the bridge since Emily is saying that The city insists on preserving the bridges’ historic character, but that will more than double the cost of the repairs. And the city will have to pay a huge amount of interest on the bonds. And this plan is efficient while Juanita is saying that thousands of cars cross the bridge so there is safety flaw,so despite the plan' flaw we need to support it.

but agree on how URGENT it is for repairs to be made,since Juanita is talking about case of daily 1000 cars crossing the bridge and Emily also saying that urgent repair is needed,only the case is that unnecessary cost is taken under the plan

Posted from my mobile device

but agree on how URGENT it is for repairs to be made,since Juanita is talking about case of daily 1000 cars crossing the bridge and Emily also saying that urgent repair is needed,only the case is that unnecessary cost is taken under the plan

Posted from my mobile device

mSKR · Answer

Prudent: 
E: very inefficient way to pay for these urgently needed repairs, so we  should  oppose it.
J: Despite the bond plan's flaws, we  have to  support it

Urgent
E: these  urgently  needed repairs
J:  really  do need repairs

nisen20 · Answer

The logic behind OA is not convincing.
 
But still, highlighted content following the two blanks determines what has to be in there.

The passage can be intepreted in an opposite way.
 
 Though Emily admits that there are some urgently needed repairs, she would rather call a halt to the plan than have it passed, indicating that she doubts the urgency of the repair while emphasizing a potential huge amount of interest incurred by the imprudent plan. 
 Juanita advocates for repairs and support, though she admits the bond plan is flawed.  
What do they disagree? The extent to which the bridge needs to be repaired as soon as possible.
What do they agree? Plan's flaws.

Fish181 · Answer

I missed this. Here are my thoughts:

I didn't think that Emily thought it was as urgent since she was willing to snub funding in order to get a better deal and defer construction. On the otherhand, I thought since Juanita wants it done at any cost she did deem it urgent. I don't understand why my logic would be flawed thinking that way.

Also I had no idea what prudent meant.

AnishPassi · Answer

Emily mentions "That makes this plan a very inefficient way to pay for these urgently needed repairs, so we should oppose it." She calls the repairs 'urgently needed'.

You mention "I didn't think that Emily thought it was  as urgent ". The level of urgency that they both feel need not be equal.

Does Juanita think that repairs are urgent? Yes.
Does Emily think that repairs are urgent? Yes. She calls them "urgently needed repairs".

Do they both think that repairs are urgent? Yes.

PeachSnapple1 · Answer

Another "trick" to do this problem. I would not call this a trick, but when you've done lots of questions on the GMAT, you kinda get used to way the question is worded. Notice that the word "possible, unlikely, difficult" all implies the possibility of doing something, so these three words cannot be all correct --> eliminate. And if the question is read carefully, it concerns the effectiveness, and not the possibility, of the plan.

Harsh_ · Answer

Bunuel  What do if we don't know the meaning of a word or doesn't understand it, eg - Prudent. In the Options above.

Krish13tss · Answer

First, "prudent" in plain English:  it means  wise, sensible, a smart use of money.  The opposite of wasteful or reckless. If a plan is prudent, it's a good, careful decision. If it's not prudent, it's a foolish or wasteful one.
 Now the question type.  This is a "point at issue" question. Blank 1 = what the two speakers  disagree  on. Blank 2 = what they  agree  on. Read each speaker for their  stance , then find the word that captures the split.
 Blank 1 — where they disagree (about the bond plan itself): 
 
 Emily says the bond plan  wastes money  — doubles the cost, piles on interest, "very inefficient." So Emily thinks funding this way is  not prudent  (not a wise use of money). 
 Juanita admits the plan has flaws but says we must support it anyway. So she thinks it's  prudent enough  — the sensible thing to do given the situation.  
They're arguing over whether the bond plan is a  wise  way to fund repairs. That's  prudent.  ✓
 Why "Difficult" (your pick) is wrong:  neither speaker ever says the bond plan is  hard to do . Emily says it's  wasteful ; Juanita says it's  flawed but necessary . The axis of their disagreement is "smart vs. wasteful," not "easy vs. hard." "Difficult" describes a dimension nobody actually raised — that's the trap.
 Blank 2 — where they agree:  Both think the repairs  must happen now.  Emily literally calls them "urgently needed repairs." Juanita stresses safety — thousands of cars daily, can't close the bridges. Both agree repairs are  urgent.

Emily: This plan to issue bonds to raise money to repair the bridges o

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

Blank 1	Blank 2
		Possible
		Unlikely
		Urgent
		Prudent
		Difficult

GMAT Two-part Analysis (TPA) Questions

Emily: This plan to issue bonds to raise money to repair the bridges o

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards