Hello! The answer to your question would be as followed:
The process of becoming a US citizen when you are not born in the united states or to parents who are US citizens is called <u><em>"The Naturalization Process"</em></u>
Your best choice here is option C as America went to war with Spain over control of Cuba because of their economic interests in the island.
1- The correct answer is A. Samuel Houston was the Texan leader who most supported the annexation to the United States. In fact, he was President of the Republic of Texas twice, and from his position he always fought for annexation, unlike others like Mirabeau Lamar. In addition, it is stated that Houston went to Texas sent by President Andrew Jackson to achieve annexation.
2- Houston argued that the annexation had to be carried out to respect the will and right of the Texan people (which were made up of American settlers) to decide the legal status of their territory. This argument is related to the right of self-determination of peoples, which I consider valid since it's theb population who has the power to decide on their future and that of the territory they inhabit and administer, not being the states able to make decisions contrary to the people and their will.
Globalization must be expected to influence the distribution of income as well as its level. So far as the distribution of income between countries is concerned, standard theory would lead one to expect that all countries will benefit. Economists have long preached that trade is mutually beneficial, and most of us believe that the experience of widespread growth alongside rapidly growing trade in the postwar period serves to substantiate that. Similarly most FDI goes where a multinational has intellectual capital that can contribute something to the local economy, and is therefore likely to be mutually beneficial to investor and recipient. And a flow of capital that finances a real investment is again likely to benefit both parties, since the yield on the investment is expected to be higher than the rate of interest the borrower has to pay, while that rate of interest is also likely to be higher than the lender could expect at home since otherwise there would have been no incentive to send it abroad. Loose talk about free trade making the rich countries richer and poor countries poorer finds no support in economic analysis.
