Another name for the key on a map is the legend. (T) (F)

Answer

Yes, in general it is true that "Socialists wanted the government to take over the businesses that affected most citizens, like railroads, electric power, and telephones" since they tend to think that society functions better when the government is in charge of regulating corporations

have a good day

Answer:

true

Explanation:

Answer:

Loyalists were those colonials who were loyal to the King of England. They may not have agreed with the policies and laws of the Crown, but they knew they had a duty to uphold the laws and remain loyal to the government that controlled their daily lives. The Patriots were those colonials who were growing weary of British rules and policies, especially when they had no say in how these laws would be made or implemented. They strived for freedom from a tyrannical royal government, often led by Royal Governors who suppressed any utterance of rebellion. The Patriots grew tired and weary of being British citizens without British rights. From my point of view it seems like the Loyalists had it easy so that's who I would pick but it's all up to you.

I hope this helps :)

Answer:

D

Explanation:

She helped English settlers Louis and Clark and for that she is an important part of our early American history

Answer:

I believe it's

The Normandy invasion was a significant turning point during the war.

Germany experienced the most casualties during the Normandy invasion.

and possibly The number of German casualties and their previous losses likely made it difficult for Germany to recover. but im not 100% sure I hope this helps

Answer:

C

Explanation:

i believe it's C because it compares where he has always lived, a noisy city, to where he will live, a little farm town.

Answer:

C.) Dominic was nervous about moving. He had always lived in the big, noisy city of Boston ever since he was born. Now he was on his way to live in a boring little farm town called Hayseed.

Explanation:

He compares Boston to Hayseed

Answer:

C

Explanation:

the whole reason why they ruled was because they could speak or listen to thier ancestors. that was the main idea in dynastys

Answer:

C

Explanation:

Give other person brainliest  

Answer:

teacher, farmer, design skills --> labor

tractor, crops --> capital

forests, farmland --> land

Explanation:

land is the physical space and natural resources

labor is the workers

capital is the money and equipment

Answer:Many Americans celebrated the passage of the 13th Amendment, which officially ended slavery in the United States. However, some people opposed the amendment and continued to support the idea of slavery. The amendment was a significant moment in American history and helped to pave the way for further civil rights advancements.

Explanation:

Answer:

the answer would be B.The Andes Mountains

Explanation:

Europeans developed the system of feudalism to help provide economic and social stability and safety. Feudalism The feudal system arose as a way of protecting property and creating stability. It was based on loyalty and personal relationships. Monarchs gave fiefs to lords, their most important vassals.

Answer:

ITS C (trust me)

Explanation:

Sorry, I'm late I did it on egde :) have a good day!!

Answer: B To experience religious freedom and obtain more land and natural resources

Explanation:

The text explained that people wished for religious freedom because it was restricted. There was promise of land in the west alongside California having gold which was more of an incentive.

Answer:

False- Islam is religion and not a person. A follower or followers of Islam are called Muslims.

Answer:

False

Explanation:

get it turned in

That a Muslim

Explanation:

From the top of a building 20 m high, a 1.7 m tall man observes the elevation of the top of a tower and finds it 45°. If the distance between the building and the tower is 50 m, find the height of the tower.

Answer:

idk

Explanation:

I think that it is  C

Hey There!! ~

The answer to this is: C) Tenth Eliminate.

Because, In Cooper v. Aaron (1958), the Supreme Court dealt with states' rights and the Tenth Amendment. The case came about when conflicts arose in direct response to the ruling of another landmark case, Brown v. Board of Education (1954). In Brown, the Supreme Court unanimously declared racial segregation of children in public schools unconstitutional. Following Brown, the court ordered district courts and school boards to proceed with desegregation "with all deliberate speed".

Among those opposing the decision (and all efforts of desegregation) was the Governor of Arkansas, Orval Faubus. A group of black students known as the Little Rock Nine were to attend the previously all-white Central High School under the school board's attempt to follow the order of Brown. The tension became severe when Governor Faubus ordered the National Guard to prevent the nine from entering the school and President Eisenhower responded with federal troops to escort them.

Five months after the integration crisis happened, the school board filed suit in the United States District Court of the Eastern District of Arkansas requesting a two-and-a-half-year delay in implementing desegregation. Although the district court granted the relief, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed the district court's decision on August 18, 1958, and stayed its mandate pending appeal to the supreme Court. By this time, the incident had evolved into a national issue: it had become a debate not only on racism and segregation but also on states' rights and the Tenth Amendment.

The Court, citing first the Supremacy Clause of Article VI declaring the Constitution the supreme law of the land, and second the Marbury v. Madison decision asserting the Court as the supreme interpreter of the Constitution as evidence of their superior authority, reaffirmed Brown and held that the states must abide by the Court's decisions despite disagreements. Expectedly, many states' right advocates and state officials criticized the ruling as an attack on the Tenth Amendment that reserves the states' right to resist the implementation of federal law or the Federal Constitution. Moreover, they claimed the Court's decision on Cooper as being inconsistent with the constitutional vision of the Framers.Thus, is C. Hope It Helped!~

\(ItsNobody\)~

Answer: All of the above, excluding farmland.

Explanation: Each of the other tasks listed could be considered a benefit of a mountain, except you can’t grow crops on mountainsides. I would therefore exclude farmlands as a usage.

Best of luck with your future studies! ☺️

Answer:

C. Submarine attacks on American Ships

Explanation:

Four days earlier, on April 2, President Woodrow Wilson addressed a joint session of Congress to request a declaration of war on Imperial Germany.  Among his reasons for war was Germany’s failure to comply with its promise to halt unrestricted submarine warfare in the North Atlantic. Continued German attacks upon merchant shipping brought Wilson to insist that “warfare against commerce is a warfare against mankind.”

Answer:

THE ACT ALLOWED FOR WITHIN THE STATS TO MAKE UP THEIR OWN DICISION ON WHETHER THEY WANTED SLAVERY OR NOY

Explanation:

Answer:

I am doing this so other person get brainliest.

Explanation:

Answer:

E i think is is

Explanation:

e i think if I'm wrong just try it

Answer:

A.

Explanation:

Hope this Helps!

Answer:

A. to get others to share your opinions

Explanation:

Answer:

he presidency of Richard Nixon began at noon EST on January 20, 1969, when Richard Nixon was inaugurated as 37th President of the United States, and ended on August 9, 1974, when he resigned in the face of almost certain impeachment and removal from office, the only U.S. president ever to do so. He was succeeded by Gerald Ford, whom he had appointed Vice President after Spiro Agnew was forced to resign. A prominent member of the Republican Party from California, he took office after the 1968 presidential election, in which he defeated incumbent Vice President Hubert Humphrey. Although Nixon had built his reputation as a very active Republican campaigner, he downplayed partisanship in his 1972 landslide reelection.

Explanation:

Ash Wednesday, Lent, and Carnival are all related to the Christian religion and are significant cultural events in Brazil. Ash Wednesday is the first day of Lent, which is a period of forty days of fasting, prayer, and repentance leading up to Easter. On Ash Wednesday, Christians attend mass and receive a cross-shaped mark of ashes on their foreheads as a sign of humility and repentance.

Carnival, on the other hand, is a festive celebration that takes place before the start of Lent. It is a time for people to indulge in food, drink, and entertainment before the forty days of fasting and abstinence begin. Carnival is a huge event in Brazil, with parades, street parties, and other festivities taking place all over the country. It is a time for people to let loose and enjoy themselves before the solemnity of Lent.

Despite their differences, Ash Wednesday and Carnival are linked by the Christian tradition of Lent. Carnival is a celebration of life and joy before the period of sacrifice and penance that is Lent. It is a time for people to enjoy themselves and have fun with family and friends. Ash Wednesday, on the other hand, marks the beginning of Lent and the start of a period of reflection and repentance. It is a time for Christians to focus on their spiritual lives and prepare for Easter. In this way, Ash Wednesday, Lent, and Carnival are all important parts of Brazilian culture and are deeply intertwined with the country's history and traditions.

Answer:

American colonists resented and opposed the Quartering Act of 1765, not because it meant they had to house British soldiers in their homes, but because they were being taxed to pay for provisions and barracks for the army – a standing army that they thought was unnecessary during peacetime and an army that they feared

Explanation:

This illustration of a British soldier practicing a military drill is from “A Plan of Discipline for the Use of the Norfolk [England] Militia,” published in 1768. Jamestown-Yorktown Foundation collection.

On March 24, 1765, the British Parliament passed the Quartering Act, one of a series of measures primarily aimed at raising revenue from the British colonies in America. Although the Quartering Act did not provoke the immediate and sometimes violent protests that opposed the Stamp Act, it did prove to be a source of contention between some colonies and Great Britain during the years leading up to the Revolution.

During the Seven Years (or French and Indian) War, British military commanders in North America often found it difficult to persuade the assemblies of some uncooperative colonies to pay for the costs of housing and provisioning the soldiers sent over to fight the French. Once the war had ended, the king’s advisors decided that some British troops should remain in North America, in theory to defend the colonies. Since the war had left Britain with a large national debt, it also was especially important that the colonies should pay their share of the costs of keeping these men in America.

Contrary to popular belief, the Quartering Act of 1765 did not require that colonists bivouac soldiers in their private homes. The act did require colonial governments to provide and pay for feeding and sheltering any troops stationed in their colony. If enough barracks were not made available, then soldiers could be housed in inns, stables, outbuildings, uninhabited houses, or private homes that sold wine or alcohol. The act did not provoke widespread or violent opposition, partly because significant numbers of British troops were stationed in only a few colonies and also because most colonies managed to evade fully complying with its provisions. To a certain extent the act was overshadowed by the response to the Stamp Act, also passed in 1765.

Nevertheless many American colonists saw the Quartering Act as one more way Parliament was attempting to tax them without their consent. Others suspected that the real purpose of keeping a small standing army in America – stationed in coastal cities, not on the frontier – was not for defense, but to enforce new British policies and taxes. The Quartering Act did become a divisive issue in 1766, however, after 1,500 British soldiers disembarked at New York City. The New York Provincial Assembly refused to provide funds to cover the costs of feeding and housing these men as required by the law. In response, the British Parliament voted to suspend the Provincial Assembly until it complied with the act. As it turned out, the suspension was never put into effect since the New York Assembly later agreed to allocate revenue to cover some of the costs of quartering these troops. The Quartering Act of 1765 was largely circumvented by most colonies during the years before the Revolution.

American colonists resented and opposed the Quartering Act of 1765, not because it meant they had to house British soldiers in their homes, but because they were being taxed to pay for provisions and barracks for the army – a standing army that they thought was unnecessary during peacetime and an army that they feared

Your questions relate to specific locations or groups. However, I can provide some general information about hunger as a social issue and how it is typically addressed.

Hunger is a problem in many areas around the world, including both developed and developing countries. It is often caused by poverty, lack of access to affordable and nutritious food, and other factors such as natural disasters and conflict.

Government agencies that may address hunger issues include the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), which administers various food assistance programs, and the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP), which works to combat hunger and malnutrition globally. Citizen groups such as food banks and charities may also work to address hunger in their local communities.

The ultimate goal of addressing hunger is to ensure that all individuals have access to sufficient, nutritious food to meet their needs. This may involve addressing the root causes of hunger, such as poverty, as well as providing direct assistance to those in need.

There are several public policy alternatives for addressing hunger, including food assistance programs, food security initiatives, and economic development programs. Potential positive outcomes of these alternatives include reducing malnutrition and food insecurity, improving health outcomes, and increasing economic stability for individuals and communities. Negative outcomes may include the potential for dependency on assistance programs and the challenge of ensuring that assistance is distributed fairly and efficiently.

To get a policy enacted, it may be necessary to build support for the policy among lawmakers and the public, as well as to develop a plan for implementation. Citizens can get involved by advocating for policies to address hunger, volunteering with organizations that work to combat hunger, and supporting initiatives that promote food security and access to nutritious food.

Your questions relate to specific locations or groups. However, I can provide some general information about hunger as a social issue and how it is typically addressed.

Hunger is a problem in many areas around the world, including both developed and developing countries. It is often caused by poverty, lack of access to affordable and nutritious food, and other factors such as natural disasters and conflict.

Government agencies that may address hunger issues include the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), which administers various food assistance programs, and the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP), which works to combat hunger and malnutrition globally. Citizen groups such as food banks and charities may also work to address hunger in their local communities.

The ultimate goal of addressing hunger is to ensure that all individuals have access to sufficient, nutritious food to meet their needs. This may involve addressing the root causes of hunger, such as poverty, as well as providing direct assistance to those in need.

There are several public policy alternatives for addressing hunger, including food assistance programs, food security initiatives, and economic development programs. Potential positive outcomes of these alternatives include reducing malnutrition and food insecurity, improving health outcomes, and increasing economic stability for individuals and communities. Negative outcomes may include the potential for dependency on assistance programs and the challenge of ensuring that assistance is distributed fairly and efficiently.

To get a policy enacted, it may be necessary to build support for the policy among lawmakers and the public, as well as to develop a plan for implementation. Citizens can get involved by advocating for policies to address hunger, volunteering with organizations that work to combat hunger, and supporting initiatives that promote food security and access to nutritious food.