Bureaucrat: The primary, constant goal of an ideal bureaucracy is to d

Option D is too extreme( "if but only if"). As per the passage, The primary, constant goal of an ideal bureaucracy is to define and classify all possible problems and set out regulations regarding each eventuality.
In the conclusion author says ideal bureaucracy will have an ever-expanding system of regulations.
So,the goal is to complete categorizing all possible needs for regulations. And having ever-expanding regulations goes contrary to that goal

Why can't the answer be 'E'. Is my reasoning for the answer not being 'E' correct?

- Statement E just repeats the statement 'if a complaint reveals an unanticipated problem(something that the bureaucracy is not able to define and classify), then it will set new regulation to deal with it.

Is this reasoning correct for the answer not being E?

Too strong.From the stimulus we can not say that every complain will reveal an unanticipated problem, it just tells us that if a complaint reveals, (there is uncertainty out here), then the regulations will be expanded to cover the issue.

Hi

This is option (E) Any complaint that an ideal bureaucracy receives will reveal an unanticipated problem that the bureaucracy is capable of defining and classifying.

Do you really need that "Any" complaint will reveal an unanticipated problem? The complaint could reveal also an anticipated one, right? So that is why (E) is wrong.

The goal of an ideal bureaucracy is to define and classify grievances that it receives. This exercise is needed so that you, as a citizen, who has a particular grievance will know how to get the proper procedure or remedy for your grievance. For example, if you have a tax problem, then you should visit the tax department, which is located on the third floor, and contact Mr. ABC, who is in charge for solving complaints. Now, the prompt says that if a complaint reveals an unanticipated problem, which is not present in the regulations, then the regulations must be expanded. So maybe you have a internet connection grievance but the regulations were perhaps formulated at a time when the internet was not invented - hence, the regulations do not provide for it - so then the bureaucracy should formulate new rules to incorporate such modern advances.

The conclusion is "an ideal bureaucracy will have an ever-expanding system of regulations." This makes sense because as new problems emerge, the regulations to overcome them will also increase. Now we have to find the assumption.


(A) An ideal bureaucracy will provide an appeal procedure for complaints even after it has defined and classified all possible problems and set out regulations regarding each eventuality.
- This is what I think Powerscore CR calls a shell game. The conclusion deals with ever-expanding regulations not with appeal procedures for complaints that the bureaucracy receives. Therefore, A is irrelevant.

(B) For each problem that an ideal bureaucracy has defined and classified, the bureaucracy has received at least one complaint revealing that problem.
- Again it is irrelevant.

(C) An ideal bureaucracy will never be permanently without complaints about problems that are not covered by that bureaucracy’s regulations.
- Hold on. The use of 'never' and 'without' is a bit confusing. What this says is that an ideal bureaucracy will always have unanticipated complaints. "problems that are not covered by that bureaucracy’s regulations" = unanticipated complaints. If you negate this, it will say that the bureaucracy will never have unanticipated complaints. This breaks down the argument because if it so then the regulations will never expand.

(D) An ideal bureaucracy can reach its primary goal if, but only if, its system of regulations is always expanding to cover problems that had not been anticipated.
- Irrelevant. The conclusion is about ever-expanding regulations not about reaching a primary goal.

(E) Any complaint that an ideal bureaucracy receives will reveal an unanticipated problem that the bureaucracy is capable of defining and classifying.
- Do all, i.e. each and every, complaints that the bureaucracy receives should necessarily reveal an unanticipated problem? What if out of 10 complaints only 3 reveal unanticipated problems. The conclusion will still be valid. This is an extreme assumption, one that is not needed by the argument to survive.

Isn't A saying something similar to C?

Suppose the bureaucrat did not make available procedures, then how would people complain and hence how would the regulations expand?

I think why A is out is because the available procedures are not the only way for people to complain. It is one of the ways, so the available procedures don't have to necessarily exist.

Posted from my mobile device

­Conclusion: An ideal bureaucracy will have an ever-expanding system of regulations.

Why does the author thinks so, because they'll always get some unanticipated problem here and there or Bureaucracy will never be able to define all possible problems.

A) An ideal bureaucracy will provide an appeal procedure for complaints even after it has defined and classified all possible problems and set out regulations regarding each eventuality. An ideal bureaucracy provides an appeal procedure for any complaint- mentioned in the passage. So essentially it is just a rephrase of what is mentioned in the passage.
B) For each problem that an ideal bureaucracy has defined and classified, the bureaucracy has received at least one complaint revealing that problem. Whether or not they've recieved complaint for defined problems is not the concern of conclusion
C) An ideal bureaucracy will never ALWAYS be permanently without complaints about problems that are not covered by that bureaucracy’s regulations. Negating this we see that ideal bureaucracy will always be without complaints of undefined problems and this breaks our conclusion because if they"ll not have unanticipated problem's complaint then no need to expand regulations
D) An ideal bureaucracy can reach its primary goal if, but only if, its system of regulations is always expanding to cover problems that had not been anticipated. Tells us how primary goal can be reached so invalid.
E) Any complaint that an ideal bureaucracy receives will reveal an unanticipated problem that the bureaucracy is capable of defining and classifying. Is it necessary for any complaint to have an unanticipated problem and also it is more of a strenghtner?

KarishmaB GMATNinja AndrewN
Am I correct in my understanding of eliminating options?
Also Pls suggest on how to negate E­

­
Premises:
The goal of an ideal bureaucracy is to define and classify all possible problems and set out regulations regarding each eventuality.
An ideal bureaucracy provides an appeal procedure for any complaint.
If a complaint reveals an unanticipated problem, the regulations are expanded to cover the new issue

Conclusion: an ideal bureaucracy will have an ever-expanding system of regulations.

What would one say is assumed here? Pre-thinking helps in assumption questions if there is a gap. By saying that regulations will keep expanding, we are assuming that unanticipated problems will keep coming through appeals, and hence to cover those the regulations will be expanded. 

Look at the options:


(A) An ideal bureaucracy will provide an appeal procedure for complaints even after it has defined and classified all possible problems and set out regulations regarding each eventuality.

We are given that an ideal bureaucracy provides an appeal procedure for any complaint. We have assumed nothing about what will happen if the bureaucracy achieves its goal. In fact we can infer that an ideal bureaucracy does not achieve its goal (and hence its regulations will be ever expanding) from the argument. Hence this is not an assumption of our argument. 

(B) For each problem that an ideal bureaucracy has defined and classified, the bureaucracy has received at least one complaint revealing that problem.

We have not assumed it. It is possible that an ideal bureaucracy itself defined and classified a problem, and not in response to a complaint. 

(C) An ideal bureaucracy will never be permanently without complaints about problems that are not covered by that bureaucracy’s regulations.

Correct. This says that there will always be things not covered by the bureaucracy’s regulations. There will always be complaints about unanticipated problems, and hence to cover those the regulations will be expanded. 

(D) An ideal bureaucracy can reach its primary goal if, but only if, its system of regulations is always expanding to cover problems that had not been anticipated.

Illogical statement. If its system of regulations is always expanding to cover problems that had not been anticipated, it will never reach its primary goal. 

(E) Any complaint that an ideal bureaucracy receives will reveal an unanticipated problem that the bureaucracy is capable of defining and classifying.

Here "any" stands for every i.e. all. 
This says that all complaints will reveal an unanticipated problem that the bureaucracy is capable of defining and classifying.
Is it necessary to be true? Is it necessary that all complaints will reveal an unanticipated problem? No. Is it necessary that a bureaucracy is capable of defining and classifying every unanticipated problem? No. 
Hence this is not an assumption.

Negation: Not all complaints that an ideal bureaucracy receives will reveal an unanticipated problem that the bureaucracy is capable of defining and classifying.

That's all right. Even if there are some complaints that do not reveal an unanticipated problem, its ok. As long as there are some complaints that do reveal an unanticipated problem, our conclusion holds.

Answer (C)

Discussion on Assumption Questions: https://youtu.be/O0ROJfljRLUA
Hard Assumption Question: https://youtu.be/0j4tovGifIg­