Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Jun 1210:00 AM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Your formula for GMAT success! Seasoned instructors + realistic practice = total confidence for test day. Use code SCORE20. Ends 6/16.
Jun 1203:00 PM IST
-11:00 AM IST
Start your journey with a fully customized action plan and work with a dedicated mentor to achieve a 735+ score.
Jun 1511:30 AM EDT
-12:30 PM EDT
Struggling to find the right strategies to score a 99 %ile on GMAT Focus? Riya (GMAT 715) boosted her score by 100-points in just 15 days! Discover how the right mentorship, tailored strategies, and an unwavering mindset can transform your GMAT prep.
Jun 1608:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Full-length FE mock with insightful analytics, weakness diagnosis, and video explanations!- Jun 21
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment
17 Apr 2020, 02:13
Kudos
Bookmarks
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
25%
(medium)
Question Stats:
75% (01:34) correct
25%
(02:04)
wrong
based on 446
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Taxpayer: For the last ten years, Metro City’s bridge-maintenance budget of $1 million annually has been a prime example of fiscal irresponsibility. In a well-run bridge program, the city would spend $15 million a year on maintenance, which would prevent severe deterioration, thus limiting capital expenses for needed bridge reconstruction to $10 million. However, as a result of its attempt to economize, the city is now faced with spending $400 million over two years on emergency reconstruction of its bridges.
The main point of the taxpayer’s argument is that Metro City
(A) should have budgeted substantially more money for maintenance of its bridges
(B) would have had a well-run bridge program of it had spent more money for reconstruction of its bridges
(C) is spending more than it needs to on maintenance of its bridges
(D) is economizing on its bridge program to save money in case of emergencies
(E) has bridges that are more expensive to maintain than they were to build
ArunSharma12
Joined: 25 Oct 2015
Last visit: 20 Jul 2022
Posts: 513
Given Kudos: 74
Location: India
Schools: IIML-IPMX '22 (A)
GMAT 1: 650 Q48 V31
GMAT 2: 720 Q49 V38 (Online)
GPA: 4
Products:
17 Apr 2020, 07:05
Kudos
Bookmarks
Quote:
Taxpayer: For the last ten years, Metro City’s bridge-maintenance budget of $1 million annually has been a prime example of fiscal irresponsibility. In a well-run bridge program, the city would spend $15 million a year on maintenance, which would prevent severe deterioration, thus limiting capital expenses for needed bridge reconstruction to $10 million. However, as a result of its attempt to economize, the city is now faced with spending $400 million over two years on emergency reconstruction of its bridges.
The main point of the taxpayer’s argument is that Metro City
The main point of the taxpayer’s argument is that Metro City
In its attempt to economize, Metro City will now have to spend $200M per year for the next two years. However had it spent $15M yearly on maintenance it would probably need not have to spend so much money
(A) should have budgeted substantially more money for maintenance of its bridges
This states the contrast with its initial plan of spending only $1M.
(B) would have had a well-run bridge program of it had spent more money for reconstruction of its bridges
Main point needs to show the contrast that describes the difference between how much city was spending earlier and how much it needs to spend now.
(C) is spending more than it needs to on maintenance of its bridges
its opposite to what passage trying to convey
(D) is economizing on its bridge program to save money in case of emergencies
There is clearly a contrast in the passage, its earlier plan is not good enough to sustain the health of the bridges
(E) has bridges that are more expensive to maintain than they were to build
This is out of scope for this passage.
Ans: A
19 Apr 2020, 23:17
Kudos
Bookmarks
Taxpayer: For the last ten years, Metro City’s bridge-maintenance budget of $1 million annually has been a prime example of fiscal irresponsibility. In a well-run bridge program, the city would spend $15 million a year on maintenance, which would prevent severe deterioration, thus limiting capital expenses for needed bridge reconstruction to $10 million. However, as a result of its attempt to economize, the city is now faced with spending $400 million over two years on emergency reconstruction of its bridges.
Stimulus: states that since last one year the governments annual budget plans for bridges was fiscal irresponsible. They allocated less funds to maintaining bridges and because of which in the last 2 years had to spend 400 million instead of the 30 million. The tax payers main point of argument was that the government should have allocated funds substantially.
IMO A
The main point of the taxpayer’s argument is that Metro City
(A) should have budgeted substantially more money for maintenance of its bridges
(B) would have had a well-run bridge program of it had spent more money for reconstruction of its bridges
(C) is spending more than it needs to on maintenance of its bridges
(D) is economizing on its bridge program to save money in case of emergencies
(E) has bridges that are more expensive to maintain than they were to build
Stimulus: states that since last one year the governments annual budget plans for bridges was fiscal irresponsible. They allocated less funds to maintaining bridges and because of which in the last 2 years had to spend 400 million instead of the 30 million. The tax payers main point of argument was that the government should have allocated funds substantially.
IMO A
The main point of the taxpayer’s argument is that Metro City
(A) should have budgeted substantially more money for maintenance of its bridges
(B) would have had a well-run bridge program of it had spent more money for reconstruction of its bridges
(C) is spending more than it needs to on maintenance of its bridges
(D) is economizing on its bridge program to save money in case of emergencies
(E) has bridges that are more expensive to maintain than they were to build
