Pharaohs the ones that got turned into mummies
Answer: C. It is not specific.
Explanation: a business message is used within a business setting for internal or external communication. For a business message to be fit for use, it has to be accurate, clear and specific. The complexity of the message should be suited to the audience, with the purpose of the writing clearly stated.
Here, Hugo’s sentence is not specific, it does not specify how much the profits have really increased. "The increase in profit is 10% greater than last year's profit" is a better sentence.
I believe that it is the monroe Doctrine
The correct answers to these open questions are the following.
The factors that reduce helping behavior are the negative of the people who are offered the help and the improper circumstances to help others. The effects of being helped are that we can lend a helping hand to the ones in need. We feel that we are doing the right thing when we can help others. And the help is unconditional when we know that the other people have no ways to return the favor or the help.
However, sometimes the phenomenon of helping behavior induces negative reactions. The factors that lead to negative reactions among people being helped are, for instance, that they could always expect to be helped and we limit their own capacity to thrive. If people are always expecting altruism form others, they get used to and instead of making an effort or work hard, they prefer to be victims and expect other people to have compassion and also to help them.
There is no objective answer to this question, as both sides have arguments that support their views.
If you believe that you are bound by Hobbes' argument, it is because of tacit consent. Tacit consent means that, even though you have not explicitly agreed to follow laws, you have indicated your agreement through other means, for example, by using the public services of the government or by remaining within the limits of your country. Also, you could argue that any rational person would prefer to follow the rules of the government than to live in the state of nature. Therefore, if you are rational, your consent is assumed. Finally, you could also argue that while you did not explicitly agreed, maybe your ancestors did, which still binds you as a member of the same society.
On the other hand, if you believe that you are not bound by Hobbes' argument, you could argue that any contract that is not freely agreed upon is not valid. As the government uses force to make you act according to the law, you cannot be considered to be freely consenting. Also, you can argue that agreeing to follow some rules does not imply following <em>all</em> of the laws of the country. Finally, a common argument against Hobbes is the lack of empirical data. As we do not know if the state of nature is actually bad, or if the contract ever happened, the government cannot gain its legitimacy in that way.