I read this background article the other day: Another obvious change that occurs during puberty is rapid growth. This is called the adolescent growth spurt. In boys, it is controlled by testosterone. The rate of growth usually starts to increase relatively early in puberty. At its peak rate, growth in height is about 10 centimeters (almost 4 inches) per year in the average male. Growth generally remains rapid for several years. Growth and development of muscles occur toward the end of the growth spurt in height. Muscles may continue to develop and gain strength after growth in height is finished. I am facing a new situation today: Jimothy and Dwight are two brothers living in the same house. Jimothy is a freshman in high school and Dwight is a junior in high school. Their mother takes them to see a doctor and to have their testosterone tested. The tests reveal that Dwight has significantly more testosterone than Jimothy, but that is to be expected given their age difference. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which boy will start developing muscles sooner?
----
Answer: Dwight

I read this background article the other day: This individual monetary gain creates an increase in the overall economic productivity of a country. Girls are underrepresented in schooling, meaning that investments aimed specifically at educating women should produce bigger dividends.[9] Although investment in women's education is not present everywhere, David Dollar and Roberta Gatti have presented findings that show that this decision, along with other failures to invest in women are not "an efficient economic choice for developing countries" and that "countries that under-invest grow more slowly."[3] Looking holistically at the opportunity cost of not investing in girls, the total missed GDP growth is between 1.2% and 1.5%.[10] When looking at different regions, it is estimated that 0.40.9% of the difference in GDP growth is accounted for solely by differences in the gender gap in education.[1] The effect of the educational gender gap is more pronounced when a country is only moderately poor.[3] Thus the incentive to invest in women goes up as a country moves out of extreme poverty.[3] I am facing a new situation today: Ethiopia and Sudan are two neighboring countries where extreme poverty can be seen. Still Ethiopia has pushed for women's education in the last decade. Sudan has largely failed in investing on women's education. Elsewhere in Africa, the country of Botswana has just overcome extreme poverty, thanks to vast mineral deposits. But they invested on women's education. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Would Sudan's economic growth be slower or faster than Ethiopia's one?
----
Answer: slower

I read this background article the other day: Capital flight, in economics, occurs when assets or money rapidly flow out of a country, due to an event of economic consequence. Such events could be an increase in taxes on capital or capital holders or the government of the country defaulting on its debt that disturbs investors and causes them to lower their valuation of the assets in that country, or otherwise to lose confidence in its economic strength. This leads to a disappearance of wealth, and is usually accompanied by a sharp drop in the exchange rate of the affected countrydepreciation in a variable exchange rate regime, or a forced devaluation in a fixed exchange rate regime. This fall is particularly damaging when the capital belongs to the people of the affected country, because not only are the citizens now burdened by the loss in the economy and devaluation of their currency, but probably also, their assets have lost much of their nominal value. This leads to dramatic decreases in the purchasing power of the country's assets and makes it increasingly expensive to import goods and acquire any form of foreign facilities, e.g. medical facilities. I am facing a new situation today: Nirvania continued to develop and became a first world country by 2025. Its economic strength and the accumulation of capital, led to prosperity and citizen happiness. On the other side of the river, Borania, however, decided to return to dictatorship and it's citizens and investors started to lose hope and move their capital to foreign accounts and investments. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which country did not increase their taxes?
----
Answer:
Nirvania