From apparently the basest metals we have the finest toned bells, and we are taught respect from simple manhood when we see how, from the various dregs of society, there come men who may well be regarded as the pride and as the watch towers of the race. Steel is improved by laying on damp ground, and the rusty razor gets a keener edge after giving its dross to the dirt in which it has been allowed to lie neglected and forgotten. In like manner, too, humanity, though it lay among the ports, covered with the dust of neglect and poverty, may still retain the divine impulse and the element of improvement and progress. It is natural to revolt at squalor, but we may well relax our lip of scorn and contempt when we stand among the lowly and despised, for out of the rags of the meanest cradle there may come a great man and this is a treasure richer than all the wealth of the Orient.

In the context of the passage as a whole, the author’s comparison between the qualities of people and of metals (paragraphs 5-6) primarily serves to

A. explain why some people are seen as great starting from birth

B. show that it is unremarkable if a few people achieve more than expected

C. limit the author’s earlier remarks about greatness to a certain subset of people

D. challenge the audience’s likely belief that the world is inherently fair

E. reinforce the author’s overarching claim about ordinary people’s capacity for success

  yr egu tgeug rgthrgeruyggry   ygueu

being buried alive

explanation:

the anwser is went creeping down the river again, across the wide lonely marshes to the sea.

i longed to go with them out into the world to seek my fortune in foreign lands—africa, india, china and peru!

and, dreaming of the lands i had never seen, i'd sit on there, watching till they were out of sight.

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