HELP PLEASE Representative Weaver claims that his bill is motivated by "safety." "Nearly half of all accidents involve people under the age of 21," Representative Weaver claims.
"Raising the driving age," he adds, would mean raising the level of safety on America's roads." But I would ask Representative Weaver the following questions: Do not nearly half
of all accidents involve men? Wouldn't the streets be safer, then, if male drivers were abolished? And what about the percentage of accidents occur on paved roads? Should we do
away with paved roads, too?
Here are some more questions I would like to ask Representative Weaver: If the driving age is raised to 21. what will happen to all the afternoon jobs, the sports, and programs that
require some sort of transportation? What will happen to America's economy (and its spirit) when high schooler students can no longer work at restaurants?
"A teenager behind the wheel is the symbol of American youth," writes author Peter Chacha. What will happen to this symbol if Representative Weaver's plan is approved? Weaver
also claims that a majority of seat belt violations are the fault of the under-21 crowd. But let me ask you this: Do people under the age of 21 really wear their seat belts less often
than older people, or are they just caught more often? We know the police have their eyes on the teenagers, but are they looking at the adults as well?
Select the correct answer
Which supporting claim does the author offer to support the argument?

A. Teenagers need to drive to participate in activities and jobs

B. Teenagers are better drivers than most adults.

C. Teenagers can learn more rules about driving safety

D. Teenagers learn to drive better later by starting young

The majestic castle, surrounded by green foliage, stood proudly with turrets pointing skyward. which image best shows a visualization of this sentence?

Read the passage. excerpt from "why equal pay is worth fighting for" by senator elizabeth warren, april 17, 2014 i honestly can't believe that we're still arguing over equal pay in 2014. when i started teaching elementary school after college, the public school district didn't hide the fact that it had two pay scales: one for men and one for women. women have made incredible strides since then. but 40 years later, we're still debating equal pay for equal work. women today still earn only 77 cents for every dollar a man earns, and they're taking a hit in nearly every occupation. bloomberg analyzed census data and found that median earnings for women were lower than those for men in 264 of 265 major occupation categories. in 99.6 percent of occupations, men get paid more than women. that's not an accident; that's discrimination. the effects of this discrimination are real, and they are long lasting. today, more young women go to college than men, but unequal pay makes it harder for them to pay back student loans. pay inequality also means a tougher retirement for women. . for middle-class families today, it usually takes two incomes to get by, and many families depend as much on mom's salary as they do on dad's, if not more. women are the main breadwinners, or joint breadwinners, in two-thirds of the families across the country, and pay discrimination makes it that much harder for these families to stay afloat. women are ready to fight back against pay discrimination, but it's not easy. today, a woman can get fired for asking the guy across the hall how much money he makes. here in the senate, sen. barbara mikulski (d-md.) introduced the paycheck fairness act to give women the tools to combat wage discrimination. it would ensure that salary differences have something to do with the actual job that they are doing, and not just because they are women. senator warren states that the effects of pay discrimination are long-lasting. is this a valid argument supported by accurate evidence? no; warren weakens her point by claiming that the paycheck fairness act would "give women the tools to combat wage discrimination." yes; warren supports her point by noting, "for middle-class families today, it usually takes two incomes to get by." yes; warren supports her point by noting, "pay inequality also means a tougher retirement for women." no; warren weakens her point by noting, "today, a woman can get fired for asking the guy across the hall how much money he makes."

Questionlect the correct text in the passageshich sentence is a compound sentence? time is not always change. time can also mean continuity, and it can mean keeping acknowledged truths in mind despite differencescircumstances. there is no better example of this in things fall apart than the retellings of the proverb about the bird named eneke.in both retellings is almost identical despite the length of time that has passed between their repetitions. in comparing the usages of thproverb, achebe allows his readers to note the similarities and differences between the situations, and he them understand howbe applied to their own lives.submit