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.