Answer:
The argument is very effective. Elizabeth Warren uses valid and sufficient evidence by specifying numerous ways by which the act will put an end to discrimination while preserving justified differences in pay.
Explanation:
Two pieces of quoted evidence from "Why Equal Pay is Worth Fighting For" by Senator Elizabeth Warren dated April 17, 2014, supports the effectiveness of the answer. Warren says:
<em>"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."
</em>
<em>"Employers can still pay different workers different salaries based on factors like skill, performance, expertise, seniority, and so forth—the Paycheck Fairness Act doesn't touch any of that."
</em>
Throughout the argument, Warren has pointed out the reasons and effects of this pay discrimination based on gender. She has also explained how employers should and can pay the employees various wages based on certain justified factors and not gender.
Answer:
Hi there and thanks for using brainly!
Explanation:
I am assuming you are referring to Raymond’s Run?
Since there is no provided paragraph i cannot answer this question properly, if you can, post another question with the paragraph so i can help you
Thanks! <3
Answer:
like lambs being attacked by wolves.
Explanation:
Hope this helps
Answer:
<u>~Male Y/n here~ I would think what the authors tone in "The Night The bell fell" is sarcastic, because they are they are saying it oppositely of what the relay mean in the viewpoint.</u>
<u>(</u>Hope this helps!)
Incomplete question. I referred to a similar situation.
Answer:
<u>D. a central character whose trustworthiness the reader is invited to doubt</u>
<u>Explanation:</u>
We can make such a conclusion because <em>the narrator</em> in the passage isn't speaking from the point of view who knows about the community's history and practices. But is open to doubts from his readers.
