Passage Summary: Big projects like schools help everyone but give some people a head start. If everyone has an equal vote, they'll probably vote down these projects, which the author thinks makes society worse off than if politicians made the calls.

Conclusion: Direct democracy via referendums is more likely to harm a society's overall well-being than a system of elected representatives.

Reasoning: Public projects that benefit everyone often have unequal initial benefits; when power is widely distributed, as in a referendum, these projects are less likely to be approved.

Analysis: There is a significant gap here: the author assumes that these 'large-scale projects' are actually essential for 'social welfare.' If those projects aren't actually good for society, then voting them down wouldn't 'diminish' welfare. We need an assumption that connects the funding of these specific projects to the overall improvement of society. Look for an answer that confirms these projects are necessary for a society's well-being or that their absence constitutes a net loss.