1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
emmasim [6.3K]
3 years ago
14

Which statement best explains how manufacturers contributed to the economic slowdown that led to the Great DepressionWhich state

ment best explains how manufacturers contributed to the economic slowdown that led to the Great Depression?
They were overproducing goods.

They were not meeting consumer demands.

They were charging high prices for their products.

They were unable to pay back loans borrowed from banks.?
History
2 answers:
PIT_PIT [208]3 years ago
7 0

Answer:

They were overproducing goods.

Explanation:

The Great Depression of the 1930s was the largest recession in history and its causes were overproduction of goods and the expansion of unbridled credit by banks.

The American economy was experiencing a period of euphoria during the 1920s. The US had become the world's leading economic powerhouse and was the largest supplier of manufactures to Europe. In this scenario, banks have expanded their credit rampantly to sustain the increase in production. However, production increased in a way that there was not enough consumer market to dispose of the products. The businessmen lost the conditions to pay their loans to the banks and the financial system collapsed.

Scorpion4ik [409]3 years ago
3 0
The answer should be A. They were overproducing goods.
You might be interested in
Which of these is a difference between state and federal laws?
kari74 [83]

Answer:

B. Federal laws can supersede state laws

6 0
3 years ago
What problem arose because jamestown colonists started looking for gold as soon as they arrived?
lidiya [134]
Jamestown ran out of food.
3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What was the most common punishment if someone was accused and convicted of witchcraft in te 1600s?
yawa3891 [41]

Answer:

According to the Official Blog of the Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries, the punishment for witchcraft was <u>death</u>.

"If any man or woman be a witch, that is, hath or consulteth with a familiar spirit, they shall be put to death. Exod. 22. 188; Deut. 13. 6, 10; Deut. 17 . 2, 6." Explanation:

6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
From 1783 until 1789, the United States was governed by the Articles of
Scilla [17]

Answer:

The Articles of Confederation were created by the Second Continental Congress. What was the purpose of the Articles of Confederation? The purpose of the Articles of Confederation was to plan the structure of the new government and to create a confederation-some kind of government.

Explanation:

7 0
3 years ago
Great Britain and France avoided a take over by fascist by
maks197457 [2]

Answer:

Great Britain and France avoid a take over by fascists' by restricting freedom of speech.

Explanation:

Fascism is a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc. , and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.  

How Britain and France avoided fascist revolution inside their own country during rise of fascism in Italy and Germany?

What made Mussolini’s Fascism, and Lenin’s Communism too, was a specific and unique situation, never to be repeated in later history: namely, the presence of enormous masses of disaffected veterans, with recent experience of war at a very high technical level of skill, and angry about the condition of their country. (And of enormous amounts of weapons.) Fascism was not made by speeches or by money, but by tens of thousands of men gathering in armed bands to beat up enemies. And that being the case, what happened to the similar masses of veterans who came home to France, Britain, and America too, after 1918?

Well, France was exhausted. She had fought with her full strength from day one, whereas Britain had taken time to deploy its whole strength, and America and Italy had only entered the war much later. For five years, every man who could be spared had been at the Front. Her losses were larger in proportion than those of any other great power. And on the positive side, France, like Britain and America, was prosperous. The veterans went home to a country that was comparatively able to receive them, give them a place to be, and not foster any dangerous mass disaffection. This is of course relatively speaking. There will have been anger enough, irritation enough, even some disaffection. But the only real case of violence from below due to disaffection was the riot in Paris that followed the Stavisky affair in early 1934, and that, compared to what took place daily in other countries, was a very bad play of a riot.

ON the other hand, both America and Britain experienced situations that had more than a taste of Fascism, but that failed to develop into freedom-destroying movements. In America, Fascism could have come from above. The last few years of the Wilson administration were horrendous: the Red Scare fanaticized large strata of the population, and the hatred came from the top, from Wilson and his terrible AG Palmer. (Palmer was a Quaker. So was Richard Nixon. Is there a reason why Quakers in politics should prove particularly dangerous?) Hate and fear of “reds” was also the driving force of Italian Fascism; and Wilson and Palmer mobilized it in ways and with goals that Mussolini would have understood. Had Wilson not suffered his famous collapse, he might have been a real danger: he intended to run for a third term in office. And the nationwide spread of the new KKK, well beyond the bounds of the old South, shows that he might have found a pool of willing stormtroopers. Altogether, I think America dodged a bullet the size of a Gatling shot when Wilson collapsed in office.

Britain’s own Blackshirt moment took place in Ireland. Sociologically, culturally, psychologically, the Blacks and Tans were the Blackshirts of Britain - masses of disaffected veterans sent into the streets to harass and terrify political enemies, bullies in non-standard uniforms with a loose relationship with the authorities. Only, their relationship with public opinion developed in an exactly opposite direction. Whereas Italy’s majority, horrified by Socialist violence at home and by Communist brutality abroad, tended increasingly to excuse the Blackshirts and wink at their violence, in Britain - possibly because of the influence of the American media, which were largely against British rule in Ireland - the paramilitary force found itself increasingly isolated from the country’s mainstream, and eventually their evil reputation became an asset to their own enemies and contributed to British acceptance of Irish independence.

Thanks,
Eddie

5 0
1 year ago
Other questions:
  • Why is transportation infrastructure important for an economy to grow? Choose the best answer. It makes trade easier. It allows
    12·2 answers
  • What was the purpose of the niagara movement
    7·2 answers
  • Regulatory commissions or a type of independent agency true or false
    7·2 answers
  • Which of the following methods helped the maya support their growing population
    8·2 answers
  • A moment in us history when justice failed?
    9·1 answer
  • How was the league advocating a form of dissent that is unacceptable in a democracy
    10·1 answer
  • HELP ME PLEASE, WILL GIVE BRAINLIEST <br><br> What would happen if banking didn’t exist?
    10·1 answer
  • Use the drop-down menus to complete the statements.
    8·1 answer
  • How did Mikhail Gorbachev's policy of glasnost contribute to the collapse of
    11·2 answers
  • Explain all the structure of public service in Nigeria​
    10·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!