Can you send a LOCI even if you haven't been waitlisted?

But why would you donate money (a larger commitment) if you're unwilling to even join the party (a smaller commitment)? It seems like the 16 percent should be entirely within the 26 percent

The question wording was kind of confusing.

I understand now why D is incorrect, but I'm still totally unconvinced about the reasoning for why A is even remotely close to correct.

I didn't choose A because the passage says that "Decentralization enables divisions of a large institution to function autonomously." In other words, decentralization is a necessary but not sufficient condition for autonomous functioning.

So a large institution can be decentralized (and thereby have more realistic planning) without having more autonomous functioning. If that's true, though, then you can have large institutions that are decentralized (and thereby have maximally realistic planning) without having divisions that are autonomous.

Why is this wrong? The only thing I can think of is that autonomous functioning allows realistic planning, not decentralization -- but the "This" in the passage leaves it unclear whether it's referring to the autonomous functioning or the decentralization.

#help

Even if that seems like the common sense answer, you have to pick the answer that the passage actually supports; the passage doesn't say anything about doctors predicting who will develop chronic back pain.

The reason why I didn't pick C is because C is referring to "mild and fleeting pain" -- we don't know anything about that. We only know that chronic pain doesn't happen for years, and we can't just assume that "mild and fleeting pain" is exactly the same as "chronic pain." (In fact, it seems like they're different.)

I thought "phenomenon" was referring to "guilt and self-loathing"...

I chose C because the wording of "there is no change in the situational context in which the conversation takes place" so closely matches the bottom of the passage, "but their taped conversations occasionally contained some Spanish, with no change in situational factors."

But I now realize that the first part, "Bilingual people often X" is nowhere in the passage... I think that if "Bilingual people often" had been replaced by "The Puerto Rican American family," the answer would have been correct.

For question 4, I didn't choose B because it says "failure to comprehend the possible consequences of drilling in complex geologic systems." From what I understand, they understand the consequences, they just don't understand the complex geologic systems. Of course they understand that oil in groundwater is bad! So I would've chosen "failure to comprehend complex geologic systems" or even "failure to comprehend drilling in complex geologic systems," but I don't understand why "failure to comprehend the possible consequences of drilling in complex geologic systems" is correct.

#help

I also chose C, but I think the reason why A makes sense is because it never says that the opponents care about deficit spending. Perhaps they want to reduce social spending for another reason -- not to reduce deficit spending. In that case, something else being the main cause of deficit spending is totally irrelevant.

Isn't (e) more of a conclusion than a necessary assumption?

#help (Added by Admin)

That actually makes a lot of sense, thanks!

I picked C because it specifies "if violence in certain movies causes violence in viewers" -- since they obviously both agree that violence is bad, that means IF they assume that violence will be caused, then yes they would agree that the movies should be restricted. How is this wrong?

#help