QUESTION TEXT: Taxpayer: For the last ten years, Metro…
QUESTION TYPE: Main Point
CONCLUSION: Metro City’s bridge program was dumb and wasteful. They should have spent more on maintenance.
REASONING: If the city had spent 15 million per year for ten years, instead of 1 million, then they would only have had to pay 10 million for repairs. Now they must pay 400 million in emergency repairs for their stupidity.
ANALYSIS: This seems like a pretty good argument. The city is paying over $250 million extra as punishment for not having steadily paid for maintenance.
___________
- CORRECT. If the city had done this, then they wouldn’t be stuck with a monstrous repair bill.
- Not necessarily. Even with sufficient money, it’s possible to bungle a bridge program.
- The taxpayer argues the opposite. If the city had spend more on maintenance, then they wouldn’t have to pay so much for repairs.
- We have no idea why the city didn’t spend enough on bridges.
- We don’t know what the bridges cost to build.
Free Logical Reasoning lesson
Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions
Leave a Reply