Plz write letter to othello and convince him not to trust what iago tells him in the play❤️I’ll pay $30 whoever writes the best 4 paragraphs

beginner

government is strong when they have the ability to persuade those they govern to believe government has enough power to force them or should be forcing them to do government’s will.

when enough of the citizenry do not believe government can force them or should force them to do its bidding, government has lost or will lose its strength and power to coerce.

when enough of the citizenry do believe government can force or should force them to do its bidding, they become passive at the least or actively pro-government and repeat government’s own rhetoric to pass on what they have been persuaded by government’s propaganda.

a true majority isn’t always needed to govern or to stop government. many times all that is needed is a strong minority. if a determined 30% of the population rises up against government in a concerted effort to bring it down, this size minority usually will succeed as long as those actively opposing the minority are less in force than the minority. so if 41% of the population sits at home watching tv rooting for one side or the other, they don’t matter. it’s the active parties who make a difference.

nobody can deny that cars are the most used means of transport all over the world. however owing a car could have some disadvantages. first of all, having a car on your own allows you to go everywhere without depending on timetables. moreover, you can use it whenever you need it no matter the time or the climate conditions. furthermore, if you have a car, you would not have to wait for nobody to share it when going to somewhere. nevertheless, one major disadvantages of owing a car is the fact that fuel is very expensive nowadays so that not everyone can afford it. in addition, you have to pay insurance to be protected by legal conditions. apart from this, the person who owns a car always has to maintain the car and repair any mechanical problem which could costs a huge amount of money. what is more, if you have to travel long distances, and you do not like driving, one probably would be exhausted and irritated due to driving for a long time. besides, cars cause environmental pollution. to sum up, owing a car means that you have more freedom to travel whenever and wherever people want to, however the car maintenance could be a very expensive issue that can have bad consequences at your economy.

first of all the mood needs to be defined: it is obviously a mood of deceitful relief and serenity. why? because the cape horn is one of the most violent maritime regions of earth and although it has been left behind, it is a personification of ahab’s delirium and the fact that the end of the passage speaks about it about being “hidden” but “raving” immediately conveys the feeling the calm is not permanent but fleeting.

furthermore, the oxymoron “mild stun'sails” is the first instance of such feeling as the adjective “mild” is associated with “stunned” underscoring the fleeting nature of this “tranquil” moment. and the contrasts keep piling up, with the opposition between “dark den” and “blessed light and air” to end with the final conclusion that leaves the reader with the uneasy knowledge that this is just a reprieve.

yes as the core issue is an ever increasing majority of human workers   will become permanently unemployed as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines inevitably replace more expensive human workers with each passing year.

economic growth now and in the future requires that fewer jobs are created for human workers. this is the desirable inevitable consequence. the automation of the jobs of human workers is the most profitable economically productive activity on the planet.

so as a global society we need to have a plan to deal with this inevitable change.

automation has been, is and will always be a friend to human society if human society on a global basis is prepared to deal with the inevitable consequences.

what is key is that automation killing all jobs is only a matter of when not if.

the real question is can we get past the now invalid assumption that most humans can work for a decent wage going forward.

i spent my working career increasing automation and increasing efficiency. this consequently reduces the hours worked by humans while increasing the output economic goods and services at an ever decreasing price.

why not have ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines create the vast majority of required economic goods and services as opposed to human workers?

why not have most human workers working less and retiring earlier?

there is much more to life than working forever.

fortunately, automation has been going on for decades and will continue as an irreversible process as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines permanently replace more costly human workers.

i write this answer for the people that have an open mind and are not living in the past this is what i feel most effectively deals with the tractable issues that automation creates.

the question at hand is how we deal with automation going forward as a society.

automation is only a threat because society has yet to acknowledge automation is happening let alone effectively a having a plan to address it.

a conservative libertarian free market idea where individuals choose what economic goods and services are produced in the free market as the free market supply will respond to free market demand. this is not a centrally planned communist economy.

it is yes as the core issue is an ever increasing majority of human workers   will become permanently unemployed as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines inevitably replace more expensive human workers with each passing year.

economic growth now and in the future requires that fewer jobs are created for human workers. this is the desirable inevitable consequence. the automation of the jobs of human workers is the most profitable economically productive activity on the planet.

so as a global society we need to have a plan to deal with this inevitable change.

automation has been, is and will always be a friend to human society if human society on a global basis is prepared to deal with the inevitable consequences.

what is key is that automation killing all jobs is only a matter of when not if.

the real question is can we get past the now invalid assumption that most humans can work for a decent wage going forward.

i spent my working career increasing automation and increasing efficiency. this consequently reduces the hours worked by humans while increasing the output economic goods and services at an ever decreasing price.

why not have ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines create the vast majority of required economic goods and services as opposed to human workers?

why not have most human workers working less and retiring earlier?

there is much more to life than working forever.

fortunately, automation has been going on for decades and will continue as an irreversible process as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines permanently replace more costly human workers.

i write this answer for the people that have an open mind and are not living in the past this is what i feel most effectively deals with the tractable issues that automation creates.

the question at hand is how we deal with automation going forward as a society.

automation is only a threat because society has yet to acknowledge automation is happening let alone effectively a having a plan to address it.

a conservative libertarian free market idea where individuals choose what economic goods and services are produced in the free market as the free market supply will respond to free market demand. this is not a centrally planned communist economy.

hope this