Re: Group 14 Question 67: The town of Burle is constructing a new...
[#permalink]
26 Feb 2021, 15:57
Official Explanation:
The town of Burle is constructing a new water reservoir system that necessitates extensive digging in the yards of the houses on several residential blocks. The town managers have promised to reimburse homeowners for any fencing, trees, or large plants that will be removed in the process. Some owners have complained that, because of the expense of hiring people to replace what has been removed, they will still be financially burdened by the project.
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim that the water reservoir system will not be financially burdensome to the homeowners?
(A) The cost of hiring people to replace what has been removed from the yards of homeowners affected by the construction of the new reservoir system will vary greatly from home to home.
(B) One year before the actual estimated start time of the work, the town of Burle made clear to all residents that the construction would take place.
(C) The new reservoir system will cut water bills for homeowners in Burle by 60%.
(D) The properties affected by the construction of the new reservoir system are some of the most expensive in Burle.
(E) An independent committee of townspeople of Burle reached the conclusion that there was no practical means of constructing the new reservoir system without digging into the yards of some homeowners.
Question Type: Inference (Assumption family)
Boil It Down: Burle is making a new reservoir system which requires digging in yards. The town has promised to reimburse the cost for removal. Some owners have complained that they will still be financially burdened.
Goal: Find the missing information that would best support this particular claim.
Analysis:
This is an interesting question, because the conclusion is in the question itself, and not in the prompt. The prompt never comes to the conclusion that the homeowners will not in fact be financially burdened, but nonetheless that is our goal to prove. As with any assumption family question, let’s plug it in:
Evidence: Even though this project necessitates extensive digging into yards, the town managers have promised to reimburse homeowners for any fencing, tress, or large plants removed in the process.
Assumption: ???
Conclusion: Despite their complaints, the homeowners will not be financially burdened by the installation of the water reservoir system.
What assumptions is the author making here? I have two immediate thoughts that maybe you share as well. First, why only reimbursement for fencing, trees, or large plants? That’s a short list isn’t it? Are those the only costs needed to be reimbursed? Perhaps our answer would say something like “only fencing, trees, or large plant removal is expensive when digging in yards, every other cost is nominal.” That would support our argument. Second, reimbursement is not the same as no financial burden, depending on the timeline. What if homeowners must front the cost, and then they don’t receive reimbursement until the next year! You must be in a good financial position to front the cost for reimbursement. Perhaps a good answer choice could then say, “homeowners will pay nothing out of pocket for reimbursement.” That could also help support the argument that no financial burden will occur. Either way, with two predictions in mind let’s look at our answer choices.
(A) The cost of hiring people to replace what has been removed from the yards of homeowners affected by the construction of the new reservoir system will vary greatly from home to home.
Hmmm. Does this help the argument? I can only see how this weakens the argument, if I’m being honest. If the cost of hiring help varies from home to home it certainly could prove to be a financial burden, especially if the reimbursement does not cover the cost of hiring help. Because this could only weaken our argument, it must be wrong.
(B) One year before the actual estimated start time of the work, the town of Burle made clear to all residents that the construction would take place.
So, the town made it clear that the construction would occur. How does this help the financial hardship? Does it hurt the argument? Does it help the argument? It is unclear what impact telling the residents that the construction will happen will have. For this reason, I can’t say for sure that this supports the argument.
(C) The new reservoir system will cut water bills for homeowners in Burle by 60%.
This is the correct answer. If the people have their water bills reduced by 60%, then any financial hardship by them will be lessened. A 60% reduction is not chump change by any means. Honestly, I was not in love with this answer, but the question asks, “Which most strongly supports this claim.” This is the only answer which could support the argument without making assumptions. A 60% reduction in cost means people are saving money, saving money means less financial hardship.
(D) The properties affected by the construction of the new reservoir system are some of the most expensive in Burle.
I’ll admit that I liked this trap answer at first. If you picked this answer, then you – much like myself – fell victim to assumptions. As we’ve discussed before, assumptions are never good when choosing an answer. Let me show you my initial line of reasoning: properties affected are the most expensive, only rich people can afford the most expensive homes, rich people will not be financially burdened by the work if they get reimbursed. However, I made too many assumptions. I assumed only rich people can afford the nicest homes. Then I assumed that rich people would not be financially burdened while waiting for the reimbursement. None of these assumptions are proven to be true. A quick google search tells me it can cost up to $20,000 to replace a full-grown oak tree. Even very well-off families could be financially burdened by this. Just because this project only affects well off properties, does not mean those owners will not be financially burdened. Do not make unwarranted assumptions when answering the question.
(E) An independent committee of townspeople of Burle reached the conclusion that there was no practical means of constructing the new reservoir system without digging into the yards of some homeowners.
No other practical means of constructing the reservoir system does not mean people will not be financially burdened by it. We need an answer which shows why financial burden will not result. It’s unfortunate that digging into yards may be the only way to complete this project, but it does not make the financial burden any less for the homeowners.
Don’t study for the GMAT. Train for it.
close
25%
(medium)
20%
(01:53)
wrong 
