What part of the passage best states hardin's central argument?
o
a. for example, a nation's land has a limited capacity to support a
population and as the current energy crisis has shown us, in some
ways we have already exceeded the carrying capacity of our land.
o
b. first, we must recognize the limited capacity of any lifeboat.
o
c. if we divide the world crudely into rich nations and poor nations,
two thirds of them are desperately poor, and only one third
comparatively rich, with the united states the wealthiest of all.
o
d. metaphorically each rich nation can be seen as a lifeboat full of
comparatively rich people. in the ocean outside each lifeboat
swim the poor of the world, who would like to get in, or at least to
share some of the wealth,
subaws

entrepreneur give a lot of money to people so the answer is a

here's some tricks. write on a book that you have read and really enjoyed. first, start by writing down basic event in the book. have your first paragraph be an intro explaining like the author, the reason the book was written if known, and other backround info like that. paragraph two explain what happens in the first few chapters and the signifigance it had. then for paragraph 3, do the same thing but for the middle. i'm pretty sure you get the point for paragraph 4. just rap things up and explain the call to action. for the final paragragh (paragraph 5) , explain your views on the book, the message, ect. tip: something that might is to go onto cliff notes or something and read the anaylisis of each chapter.

some books i recommend;

diary of anne frank

lord of the flies

"character is what you are in the dark." dwight lyman moody, in this very witty quotation of his, states we act and think differently when we are "in the dark", that is, when the spotlight is not on us and everyone can see us and consequently judge us. when reading, we tend to be sympathetic to some characters and their dilemmas. by being so, we are saying to ourselves that we agree with those characters' acts and choices, even if they are morally questionable if we have common sense in mind. dwight lyman moody's quotation applies very well to "crime and punishment", by   19th century russian writer fiodor dostoyevsky. raskolnikov, the main character, a former law student who spends his days reflecting upon life and its misery, draws a fatal conclusion: mankind is divided in two main categories: ordinary and extraordinary people. the first are the ones who lead a run-of-the-mill existence and are full of imperfections; the latter are the ones who are spiritually superior, the ones who always know better, and have the right to judge the ordinary ones, as well as eliminate them if for common good. raskolnikov considers himself as belonging to the extraordinary category and decides to kill an old lady who is a money lender and in whose house he rents a small room. raskolnikov compares himself to napoleon, who had the undeniable right to execute tons of people during the war in order to save his nation. of course what the main character decides to do is a horrendous crime, but as readers we feel it is the right thing for him to do, since the victim is a mean old woman who only thinks about money and keeps humiliating her younger sister. what one experiences is a mixture of sympathy and empathy for the character, even though he decides to commit homicide, which is not at all accepted or tolerated by civilized citizens. however, since readers are "in the dark", they allow themselves to feel in ways they would probably never dare to confess to anyone, no matter how nasty or vicious a character can be. after all, they are just reading and doing no harm. in other words, readers are in the dark and can be who they are without being judged.

on apex:

removing american indians from the south is for their own good.