Consider the following premises. For all y, if y were an artist, then y is a cashier. There is at least one y for which y will not make tea. For all y, if y drinks water, then y is an artist. For all y, y is a cashier if and only if y will make tea. Can we infer the following from them? If we can, name the inference rule being used: For all y, y will drink water.
 From the fact that for all y, if y drinks water, then y is an artist, and that for all y, if y were an artist, then y is a cashier we can infer that for all y, if y drinks water, then y is a cashier via universal transitivity. From the fact that for all y, y is a cashier if and only if y will make tea we can infer that for all y, if y were a cashier, then y is making tea via universal biconditional elimination. From the fact that for all y, if y drinks water, then y is a cashier, and that for all y, if y were a cashier, then y is making tea we can infer that for all y, if y drinks water, then y is making tea via universal transitivity. Finally, from the fact that for all y, if y drinks water, then y is making tea, and that there is at least one y for which y will not make tea we can infer that there is at least one y for which y will not drink water via existential modus tollens, which contradicts that For all y, y will drink water. Therefore, the answer is no.