I say B. Cherrys as the answer according to some research that seems to be the answer so ok
Answer:
A) The first is a prediction about a recommendation the main argument opposes; the second is a conclusion drawn in order to support the main conclusion.
Explanation:
From the argument above by the two senators, it could be seen that the two Senators are argueing in favour and argainst the Tax. Senator Baker, was of the believe that his opponent, Senator Rothmore calling for increase in taxes to fund programs helps the long-term unemployed.
His argument was based soley on the unemployed without factoring in the small businesses that would be killed off as a result of the tax increment. The fall of small businesses would definitely affect the prediction he made about unemployed getting work. This is because, those unemployed can only work by the opportunities created by the small businesses.
Senator Baker only made the second conclusion inorder to support his argument on the need to lower taxes which would drive job creations thereby being a win-win situation for both the government and the citizens.
Yes it is salvation for human king promise
The correct answers are treatment; depression levels.
Answer 1: The independent variable (IV) in this study is the treatment the clients receive; that is, whether or not they received <span>cognitive-behavioral treatment. An IV is an experimental variable in a study that is controlled and manipulated in order to measure its effects on dependent variables or outcomes.
Answer 2: </span>The dependent variable (DV) in this study is the clients' depression levels. DVs refer to outcome variables or results that are obtained as a result of manipulating an IV. In this instance, the manipulation of the IV (whether the participants received cognitive-behavioral treatment or were instead wait-listed) led to the DV- clients' depression levels. Specifically the researchers were investigating whether receiving the treatment had an influence on clients' depression levels.
