Answer:
propaganda
Explanation:
it helped entertain the troops and remind them what they were fighting for
Answer:
<u>Integration of Indians in American society</u>
Explanation:
The federal government has almost adopted an act that has further damaged India's interests even more fundamentally. Dawes Act of 1887 intended, to assist the Indians by staying on their land and integrating them into American society. This had a very different effect.
The act laid down the conditions that would give back to the Indians their common rights to their tribal land and instead individual estates of 160 acres (the value of the land was granted by white settlers). Any surplus land in the territory will be sold, and the proceeds will go to the tribes.
This plan was doomed to fail over a short period of time because it was impossible for hunters and warriors to quickly transform into farmers. In the long run, this had the effect of giving the Indians about two-thirds of the 138 million acres of land reserved for them. The energy with which white settlers ransacked free land is clearly evident in Native American territory, first on the reserves.
Answer:
My Car: I bought my car in 2015 from one of the local dealers. The Creditors can also use my car that currently as collateral. The car registration book has my name inscribed on it hence I own the vehicle. In the event of a need for credit, the creditors would lend me money worth the car. An attachment would occur when I sign the creditor’s contract with the bank in the condition of the car as the security.
My Land: Apparently I was deemed the legal owner of the land because I possessed an authenticated original title deed pertaining to the land with my name written on it. I signed the security agreement or the credit contract and as such the bank gained interest in the collateral hence attachment.
My AC: For the AC, a similar procedure has to happen in a secured credit transaction. Given that, I have all the receipts about the AC, I can use it as collateral. The creditors can lend an equivalent value to the AC. To seal the security agreement, I would sign the credit contract hence an attachment.
For each of the three items, explain if and when perfection occurred.
According to Distenfield & Distenfield (2005), the perfection of a security interest is the act of ascertaining one’s interest in a collateral hence preventing other parties from creating an attachment to the same collateral. Such parties would include other creditors and bankruptcy trustee among others. For the land, the creditor would perfect its interest by possessing the title deed pertaining to the land. Alternatively, the creditor would perfect its interest in the land collateral by filing a financial statement with the necessary public office. Just like the land, the creditor can possess the car's registration book hence perfection. Lastly, the creditor possesses the AC collateral hence perfecting in the collateral.
Explain the priority each of the creditors would have if you defaulted on your promise to pay
In an event of my failure to pay the already secured credit transaction, the creditor would obtain the collateral in lieu of the payment. The priorities of the creditors should only pick the items listed as securities and only those he or she has a security interest. For example, the creditor cannot take personal property or the home as collateral if it was not part of credit contractual agreement.
Explanation:
Answer:
The Navigation Act was considered a ECONOMIC ACT.
Explanation:
The United Kingdom made this act to help itself become self-sufficient, and this made it so it relied less on imported goods, and rely on itself more. This act eventually led to the Anglo-Dutch War in 1652, and after that, it led to the Plantation Duty act of 1673, which was the main factor in causing Culpeper's Rebellion. Hope this helps!
The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution <span> authorized the president to take "all necessary measures to repel armed attack" in Vietnam.
This resolution had significant consequences for the Vietnam War and beyond that time. In regard to the Vietnam War, it provided the justification for the president, Lyndon Johnson, to escalate US involvement in the war and magnify the number of US troops there by hundreds of thousands. In US foreign policy in general, it represented an increase of the power of the Commander in Chief (the president) to deploy troops without getting formal approval in advance from Congress.
</span>
