The Hernandez family orders 3 large pizzas. They cut the pizzas so that each pizza has the same number of slices, giving them a total of 24 slices.
The Wilson family also orders several large pizzas from the same pizza restaurant. They also cut the pizzas so that all
their pizzas have the same number of slices. For the Wilson family, the equation y = 10x represents the relationship,
where x represents the number of pizzas and y represents the number of total slices.
Which statements best describe the pizzas bought by the Hernandez and Wilson families? Select two options.
For the Hernandez family, the equation y = 3x represents the relationship between the number of slices and
number of pizzas, where x represents the number of pizzas and y represents the number of total slices.
For each family, a graph of the relationship between number of pizzas, x, and number of slices, y, goes through
the point (0,0) and is a straight line.
The Hernandez family's slices are smaller than the Wilson family's slices.
If the Wilson family ordered 3 large pizzas from the same restaurant as the Hernandez family, they would have
more slices than the Hernandez family after each family cut their pizzas into slices.
The constant of proportionality is 10 for the Wilson family, but cannot be determined for the Hernandez family.

well so many people believe its a sin to be gay or be apart of the lgbtq+ community, but i believe you should be you. don't let people tell you you cant be someone. be who you are because you will be uncomfortable your whole life. be you!

1. alliteration

2. wistful

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

i'm thinking it would be when compound subjects are joined by or, nor,either-or, neither-nor.