Governor: The bridge that spans the Brookline and Kings boroughs is in

(A) The consequence if leave the bridge damaged is out of concern
(B) The commuters' condition is out of scope as long as they pay the toll
(C) Definitely yes!! If the toll deter the commuters to transit by public transport,the target fund might be impossible to reach
(D) Totally out of scope
(E) Whether the residents in Brookline and Kings use this bridge is not the concern.Majority of vehicles crossing this bridge could even from other towns

Actually Governor is assuming that over one million vehicles are using the bridge so if he collects $1 from each of them then he would have enough funds to repair bridge.

If you negate C, it would be :

The toll will not induce some commuters to use mass transit when traveling between the two boroughs.

So if enough number of vehicles will not use the bridge then he would not be able to collect enough fund for bridge repair.

Governor is not considering the economical condition of commuters.
Raising fund might be the hardship on the commuters but he is not considering it.

Below is the explanation from Veritas. It says B strengthens the argument.

Correct Answer: C
The argument claims that by charging a $1 toll, the city will raise the required $30 million in a month to cover the cost of repairs. Using the Assumption Negation Technique (ANT), we will find that by negating answer choice C (the toll WILL induce some commuters to use mass transit) the argument is no longer valid. C, if negated, would mean that commuters who would otherwise pay the toll will use mass transit and, therefore, not contribute to the toll revenues, causing the city to fall short of the governor's prediction. Answer A is irrelevant. While tragic, the collapse of the bridge need not be assumed for the argument to be valid. While answer choice B strengthens the governor's argument, it is not an assumption that the argument is dependent upon. In answer choice D, the subsequent capacity of the bridge is irrelevant as to whether the toll will be able to raise enough money. While choice E helps the governor's case, it is not necessarily a required assumption of the argument. We do not care why the residents use the bridge, but whether they will use it at all after the toll is implemented.

Hi,

but have or not hardship is not related to our conclusion. Assumption question MUST BE TRUE in order to have our conclusion.

Hardship VS money to rise ......is not related. at all and in anyway.

Hope this helps

Can we reasonably define 90% or 99% of commuters as some commuters? I don't think so. Between C and E, though E has limited applicability only to commuters to work, it makes a stronger statement than does C.
E seems more appropriate.

Governor: The bridge that spans the Brookline and Kings boroughs is in desperate need of repair with estimates in the range of $30 million. Over one million vehicles cross the bridge each day. Therefore, if the city charges a mere $1 dollar toll for crossing the bridge, we will be able to raise enough funds to make repairs to the bridge within a month.

Which of the following is an assumption upon which the governor's argument depends?

(A) The bridge, if not repaired, will likely collapse, causing the deaths of many people.
out of scope
(B) The toll will not cause a significant hardship on the commuters that use the bridge.
out of scope
(C) The toll will not induce some commuters to use mass transit when traveling between the two boroughs.
Most relevant option,also clears the possiblity of failure of the plan.
(D) After the repairs to the bridge are complete, it is estimated that the bridge will be able to handle 20% more traffic.
Out of scope
(E)Most of the residents in Brookline and Kings use the bridge to commute to work each day.
out of scope

Option C is the best choice here.
Negated statement: The toll will induce some (can be one or more) commuters to use the mass transit.....

If this is the case then the 1 Million vehicles that cross the bridge daily will be reduced by some number depending on the total number of people using mass transit. This will definitely reduce the success of the 30 day plan.

Whereas information stated in option E is already stated in the argument and thus is not an assumption (unstated premise).

1. Governor: The bridge that spans the Brookline and Kings boroughs is in desperate need of repair with estimates in the range of $30 million. Over one million vehicles cross the bridge each day. Therefore, if the city charges a mere $1 dollar toll for crossing the bridge, we will be able to raise enough funds to make repairs to the bridge within a month.

Conclusion: charging $1/per person/per visit will raise $30 m in 30 days
Assumption: will the charge change people’s habits?

Which of the following is an assumption upon which the governor's argument depends?

The bridge, if not repaired, will likely collapse, causing the deaths of many people. - doesn’t contribute to the conclusion
The toll will not cause a significant hardship on the commuters that use the bridge. - close, but it doesn’t necessarily matter if there is hardship on the commuters. it goes halfway in saying that the hardship will deter the commuters from using the bridge.
The toll will not induce some commuters to use mass transit when traveling between the two boroughs. - correct!
After the repairs to the bridge are complete, it is estimated that the bridge will be able to handle 20% more traffic. - it doesn’t matter what will happen after the repair.
Most of the residents in Brookline and Kings use the bridge to commute to work each day. - that is just a fact and doesn’t affect the conclusion.

very ambigious question, i dont think it's valid

However some implies 0->99.999%. It could be the case that some means 1 person only. So If there is only 1 person who did so, "The toll will induce a commuter to use mass transit when traveling between the two boroughs.", then I guess it does not affect the plan that much, does it? IMO, this is not a good question.

I actually think the question has some merit and is testing one’s ability to pay close attention to the modifier words in a given answer choice.

Conclusion made: if we charge $1 toll each day, we will raise enough money to pay for the estimated $30 million in bridge repairs within 1 month (~30 days)


Supporting evidence that the author uses to advance the conclusion: “Over 1 million drivers use the bridge each day.”

You can see where the mind of the author is heading. The author believes that these 1 million ppl who drive each day will pay the $1 a day and we will get our $30 million within approximately 30 days.


(E) “MOST of the residents of Brookline and Kings use the bridge to commute to work each day.”

In order for the facts to support the author’s claim, must he assume that MOST of the RESIDENTS of the 2 cities use the bridge for the specific purpose of commuting to work each day?

All we are told is that 1 million people use the bridge each day.

-if there are 50 million residents of these cities and 1 million continue to use the bridge, the argument still stands. The author does not need to assume that “most” of these residents will use the bridge. Only that the 1 million mentioned will CONTINUE to use the bridge and actually pay the toll.

There are a couple of other details that stick out about answer choice E. For instance, must the author assume that the commuters are from these particular 2 cities, or does the argument still stand if any 1 million drivers cross the bridge? As long as ANY 1 million people continue to use the bridge and pay the toll, the facts still support the argument.

E is not a required assumption.

(B)”The toll will not cause a significant hardship on the commuters who use the bridge.”

If this answer choice were true, then it might be an answer choice that slightly weakens the conclusion that the money will be raised within a month.

Put another way, the answer might make it slightly more likely that the 1 million drivers will continue to use the bridge and pay the toll.

But even if the toll DOES cause a significant hardship on the drivers, this does not necessarily mean that the 1 million drivers will stop using the bridge such that the toll money will not be collected.

Perhaps this bridge is the only avenue available. We do not know.

This answer choice also presents the danger of relying on the Negation Technique too much.

When negated, the answer choice does make it less likely that the drivers will continue to use the road. This in turn makes it a little less likely that the plan will work as advertised.

However, the question we need to ask is the following: is it REQUIRED that the author assume that the bridge not cause significant hardships in order for his argument to be valid, I.e., for his plan to work?

The answer is no. Given the supporting facts, the author need only assume that the 1 million drivers will continue to use the road each day and will actually pay the toll so that the money is raised within a month. The author does not need to assume anything about what hardships these drivers may suffer.

B is not a required assumption.

C is the only required assumption. In order for the plan to work and the money to be raised within the 1 month period, the 1 million drivers must continue to use the bridge and pay the toll. If the drivers were to use mass transit instead, then the facts no longer support the conclusion.

The author must assume that the 1 million drivers who use the bridge each day will continue to use the bridge each day and pay the toll. Otherwise, the entire argument falls apart.

C

Posted from my mobile device

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.