Looking at this in terms of sets, let's call O the set of all owls, and F the set of all things that can fly. What this original statement is saying every animal that's a member of the set of all owls is also a member of the set of all things that can fly, or in other words, O⊂F (O is a subset of F). Negating this tells us that, while there's <em>at least one</em> element of O that also belongs to F, O is not contained entirely in F (O⊆F, in notation), so a good negation or our original statement might be:
<em>Not all owls can fly.</em>
I think it's none because that should be communitive and that's not there so.
First, you factor and simplify (respectively) the numerator and denominator. Your equation becomes:

Notice, there is a (x + 7) on both the top and the bottom. Because of this, they cancel each other out. What is left is your answer:
This would actually be a very broad question. So, when considering these kinds of questions, one thing that we would really want to consider would be the

value in this case. We would want to find the amount, and also the terms of the expression.
So, let's suppose that the amount would be 200.
And let's say that Shauna makes 5 a week.
Then the expression would then look like


I hope this would help you in your case of the problem! :)