20. How does the figurative language in the last three lines of the poem "So I stand strong like a tree my baby brothers can lean on. I try to be the raft that helps carry them over this life's rough rivers." contribute to its overall meaning? The speaker is trying to be strong for his mother The speaker emphasizes the importance of the speaker's role in his family, and the support he provides for his brothers. The speaker is comparing his life to a raft being carried over rough rivers All of the above

I believe the best choice is:

D. All of the above.

Explanation:

Let's take a brief look at the poem "David's Old Soul", by Nikki Grimes:

As far back as I can remember, my

mother has called me “an old soul.”

I never understood. But now that our family has

dwindled to just Mom and us kids, I’ve grown

into a man. You do what you have to. “David, dig deep,”

is the whisper in my ear. So I stand strong like

a tree my baby brothers can lean on. I try to be the

raft that helps carry them over this life’s rough rivers.

The speaker of the poem realizes the need to be strong, to grow "into a man". His mother and his baby brothers need him to be reliable, now that it is only them, now that their family has "dwindled". He is trying to show readers he has a crucial role in his family. His strength and determination create a solid foundation for his mother and brothers to support themselves upon. The speaker's own life is compared to a raft. He is the one carrying everyone, facing the current while keeping them safe. For that reason, all of the options are correct, which leads us to choose letter D. All of the above.

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

the first, third, and last sentences are correct for plato.