Which sentence is correct in the interpretation of this text?

p. s.: could you explain your answer to me? why didn't you choose another alternative? explain it to me using grammatical rules?

a comprehensive study of wealthy families by private bank u. s. trust found that only 40% of high net worth investors feel 'bullishly optimist' about the market. at the same time, 10% said they felt downright pessimist and 12% described themselves as fearful of losing money. jim quilan, chief market strategist for u. s. trust, says a lot of rich people continue worry about regulation, washington gridlock, an the lingering effects of the federal reserve's unprecedented stimulus program, which has propped stocks and the housing market but hasn't done much for the rest of the economy. "there are lot of things keeping them jumping in with both feet', quintan claims. quintan says the rich may also be playing catch-up after sitting on the sidelines for the last few years. the study revealed that wealthy investors who currently hold more than 10% of their portfolio in cash were three times as likely to say they missed out on the market rally. 'these investors have been whipsawed. five years ago their big nest egg was shrinking dramatically' he says. some of these folks may have been lagging behind, now they're coming back.

a) the study was written without using techinical jargon, so that even the uninteated can understand its content.

b) the study actually is not only optimistic, but also sympathetic towards investors, as it author understand the investors' fears.

c) the report issued through

d) it is understandable that the u. s trust would realease such a timely report.

Write an essay on your aim in life to become engineer

What is in his westrose president lincoln central claim in the speech

Read the passage. excerpt from "why equal pay is worth fighting for" by senator elizabeth warren, april 17, 2014 i honestly can't believe that we're still arguing over equal pay in 2014. when i started teaching elementary school after college, the public school district didn't hide the fact that it had two pay scales: one for men and one for women. women have made incredible strides since then. but 40 years later, we're still debating equal pay for equal work. women today still earn only 77 cents for every dollar a man earns, and they're taking a hit in nearly every occupation. bloomberg analyzed census data and found that median earnings for women were lower than those for men in 264 of 265 major occupation categories. in 99.6 percent of occupations, men get paid more than women. that's not an accident; that's discrimination. the effects of this discrimination are real, and they are long lasting. today, more young women go to college than men, but unequal pay makes it harder for them to pay back student loans. pay inequality also means a tougher retirement for women. . for middle-class families today, it usually takes two incomes to get by, and many families depend as much on mom's salary as they do on dad's, if not more. women are the main breadwinners, or joint breadwinners, in two-thirds of the families across the country, and pay discrimination makes it that much harder for these families to stay afloat. women are ready to fight back against pay discrimination, but it's not easy. today, a woman can get fired for asking the guy across the hall how much money he makes. here in the senate, sen. barbara mikulski (d-md.) introduced the paycheck fairness act to give women the tools to combat wage discrimination. it would ensure that salary differences have something to do with the actual job that they are doing, and not just because they are women. senator warren states that the effects of pay discrimination are long-lasting. is this a valid argument supported by accurate evidence? no; warren weakens her point by claiming that the paycheck fairness act would "give women the tools to combat wage discrimination." yes; warren supports her point by noting, "for middle-class families today, it usually takes two incomes to get by." yes; warren supports her point by noting, "pay inequality also means a tougher retirement for women." no; warren weakens her point by noting, "today, a woman can get fired for asking the guy across the hall how much money he makes."