Writing: Compare-and-Contrast Essay: The Tragedy of Julius CaesarTwo Julius Caesar Speeches Brutus and Mark Antony both delivered speeches after the death of Julius Caesar. How do these speeches relate to the conclusion of the play?

Write an essay that compares and contrasts the two speeches and connects them to the resolution of the play. Include quotations from the speeches to explain your thinking. You can reference the text here. As you write, remember your essay will be scored based on how well you:
develop a multi-paragraph response to the assigned topic that clearly communicates your thesis to the audience.
support your thesis with meaningful examples and references from the text, carefully citing any direct quotes.
organize your essay in a clear and logical manner, including an introduction, body, and conclusion.
use well-structured sentences and language are appropriate for your audience.
edit your work to conform to the conventions of standard American English.
PLEASE HELP ASAP

In William  Shakespeare's play The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, two speeches are given to the  people of Rome about Caesar's death. In Act 3, Scene 2 of this play Brutus and  Antony both try to sway the minds of the Romans toward their views. Brutus tried  to make the people believe he killed Caesar for a noble cause. Antony tried to  persuade the people that the conspirators committed an act of brutality toward  Caesar and were traitors. The effectiveness and ineffectiveness of both Antony's  and Brutus's speech to the people are conveyed through tone and rhetorical  devices.  

he correct answer is choice c. promoters of ufc events were eager to work with state athletic commissions, without public pressure being a necessary inducement.

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