Good morning! Have A nice day too!
Answer:
I urge your esteemed newspaper to publish a notice call to the concerned departments to look into this matter immediately.
Explanation:
789 Hari Hara Lane
Chuo City
Tokyo 143-0024
The Editor
The Capital Times
13th Avenue Tower
Tokyo 110-0016
To the concerning authority,
I'm compelled to write this letter to your esteemed authority to express my concern regarding the quality of air in the capital city. It has been observed both by the citizens and various organisations that air pollution within the city is increasing rapidly since the last 5 years.
It is a threat to the lives and welfare of the citizens living in the city especially for children and senior citizens. Therefore, I urge your esteemed newspaper to publish a notice call to the concerned departments to look into this matter immediately. I firmly believe your participation in this matter will have a great impact for the betterment of the capital. Than you.
Yours sincerely,
Yahiko Watanabe.
Employee A in 4 years logged travel hours of = 120
Percentage more of travel hours logged by Employee B in 4 years = 20%
Then
Amount of travel hours logged by employee b in 4 years = (120/100) * 120
= 12 * 12
= 144 hours
Then amount of travel hours logged by Employee B after 1.5 years = (144/4) * 1.5
= 216/4
= 54 hours
Amount of travel hours logged by Employee A after 1.5 years = (120/4) * 1.5
= 180/4
= 45 hours.
Number of hours that Employee B had
than Employee A after 1.5 years = (54 - 45) hours
= 9 hours
So emplyee B had logged 9 hours more than Employee A after 1.5 years.
<span>Bear-proof trash cans have been shown to be effective in other towns in this state. This reasoning is VALID because it provides evidence that bear-proof trashcans are effective.
If we want to show that we keep up with the latest methods, we need to require bear-proof trash cans. This reasoning is INVALID because it does not prove these types of cans would do anything to prevent bears from getting in them. This argument has more to do with "showing" people the town can "keep up."
If we can spend money on schools and the fire department, we can also spend it on bear-proofing. This reasoning is INVALID because, in order to spend money on something, it must be proven effective. This argument does not prove that bear-proof cans are effective; it merely says money should be spent on them because money is also spent on other things.
Last year, a tourist in town was mauled by a bear on trash day. This reasoning is VALID because there appears to be a connection between the tourist's d</span>eath and the trashcans. In this case, the bear would have known that trash day = food day, and so the bear was invading human space that day and came into contact with a tourist. With bear-proof cans, bears would no longer associate trash with food, and so these types of incidents could be prevented.
Answer:
It meant that even in America,<em> racial discrimination or racis</em>m was being practiced and people were doing nothing about it. The black people were not considered part of the country because they were not given the equal freedom of the white people. Many of them were also killed and tortured. It's about time that the people have to tell the government about its wrongdoing and stand-up against it.
<em>John Kerry was stating this in order to let the United States know that they should choose to have "peace" with the Southeast Asian countries like Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam rather than invading them.</em>
Explanation:
The question above is related to John Kerry's testimony before the Senate Panel in<em> 1971</em>. <u>He was proposing that the United States of America should end the war.</u> He acted as a representative of the Vietnamese veterans who thought that America betrayed them by telling them to invade Vietnam for the country's sake.
However, they came back to the country,<em> not proud</em> because <u>people hated them for what they did in Southeast Asia.</u> They fully understood how Vietnamese felt when they resisted to the colonization of America.
