Answer:
Explanation:
The buildup of savings did this because it meant that after the war, people would have lots of money saved up that they could use to buy consumer goods. Once the war ended, the factories would have to turn from producing war materiel to producing consumer goods again. If people had little money, there would have been little demand for these goods. But during WWII, people saved a great deal of money. Once the war ended, they could use that money to buy things like cars that had not been available during the war. This flurry of buying prevented a depression.
I had this question on one of my tests, and the right answer was:
<span>Colonial women had social and political influence, despite having few legal rights. I am 100% positive this is the right answer. :)</span>
it was also called the Seven Years War
Answer:
A
Explanation:
because they lived in the revaloution
Answer:
“I do think that if there were a long term—I don’t know, 18, 20 years, something like that, and it was fixed—I would say that was fine. In fact, it’d make my life a lot simpler, to tell you the truth.” – Justice Stephen Breyer1
“The Framers adopted life tenure at a time when people simply did not live as long as they do now. A judge insulated from the normal currents of life for twenty-five or thirty years was a rarity then, but is becoming commonplace today. Setting a term of, say, fifteen years would ensure that federal judges would not lose all touch with reality through decades of ivory tower existence. It would also provide a more regular and greater degree of turnover among the judges. Both developments would, in my view, be healthy ones.” – Future Chief Justice John Roberts2
The rules governing the U.S. Supreme Court must be updated to reflect the reality of life in modern America. The average tenure of a Supreme Court justice has significantly lengthened since the establishment of the federal judiciary in the 1700s, giving outsize power to nine individuals in a way the framers of the Constitution could never have imagined. This longevity has resulted in a lack of regularity in vacancies, introducing further randomness to the judicial selection process. As a result, the confirmation process for the highest court has become politically divisive, with extremely narrow votes and theatrics from the nominees themselves. This state of affairs is untenable; policymakers must address it by enacting legislation to create term limits for justices.
