Whenever a warning of this sort is given, the following assumptions are implicit: I. There is something foul in the air; there can be no smoke without fire; and II. The warning will have a positive effect in checking the problem.

I is implicit; it is to dispel this myth that the statement has been issued in public interest. but being inferior in quality is not the same as being adulterated; hence II is not implicit.

The need to treat properly the elderly and the disabled stem from both the assumptions.

The speaker is assuming I; that is why he has started so. In his opinion as the economy is growing well, employment rate should increase. He is not assuming about any other factor that influences employment.

From the statement it is clear that the speaker has no doubt about the credibility of inquiry reports. Hence I is not implicit. II has too strong a world in never.

I is not implicit because it implies that value-based voting still prevails, though it does not have too long a future. But the statement clearly suggests that value-based voting is absent. What about Assumption II, which talks of the potential of value-based voting? Well, the only potential the speaker has in mind is that it's a step in the positive direction. But can it undo what has been done ? we don't know.

Such messages are sent to get control of a problem. II is the implicit problem. I is expected to help in getting control of the problem.

I is implicit; that is why the PIOs have maintained the Indian culture even in alien settings. But II is not implicit because a comparison between the two cultures is nowhere hinted at.

DTC authorities are assuming both the assumptions; that is why they have planned so.

Even able parents may be not willing to pay the increased fee. Hence I can't be assumed. Why are they demonstrating in front of Legislative Council? Clearly, they are assuming II. Hence II is implicit.