22. A. supply
23.b.
please put brainliest! :)
thanks!
In order to answer this question, I will use two different perspectives of ethics: the consequentialist perspective, and the deontological perspective.
Consequentialism argues that the morality of an action lies with its consequences. This means that an action with bad consequences is an immoral action, and vice versa. In this case, killing the last remaining Redwood would not have any negative consequence on any being in the world, as no one benefits from it anymore. This means that the act is not immoral.
A deontological perspective states that there are principles that should be taken as rules, and which govern what is right and what is wrong. Therefore, rules and duties are central. For example, a principle might state that "all life is valuable." As the Redwood falls under the definition of life, killing it would be considered an immoral action.
The statements are
- <span>preventing monopolies
- </span><span>ensuring that businesses accurately report their earnings
- </span><span>keeping prices fair
Financial regulations are created as a form of protection for both producers and consumers. Preventing monopolies will keep the situation fair for the new business to come in and compete, accurate earnign reports will make sure that all business pay their taxes appropriately, and keeping prices fair will ensure that the companies wouldn't take advantage of their customers with overpricing.</span>
Charles poulett Thomasn is know as the barons of downtown Kingston
