Governments provide safety nets in case of injuries, layoffs, natural disasters, or severe shortages.
Answer:
(Near Civil war) In the South, people made profit out of slavery by making them do work in farms or serve wealthy families. Meanwhile in the North, slaves were free but not treated equally as whites.
During the decline, the Roman army had been severely weakened to the
point where invaders that could have previously been defeated by the
Empire were eventually able to destroy it. Ultimately, the Roman Empire
collapsed because of "the general failure of its armies to perform the
tasks that were required of them." One reason for the breakdown of the
army was that the Roman legions would fight in civil wars over their
choices for Emperor because they were unhappy with the weaker Emperors
that were frequent in the later Roman Empire. "These struggles served as
an irresistible invitation to German and other enemies to break into
the distracted provinces." Although the civil wars served as a
distraction to the Roman army, the wars also had a detrimental effect on
the army because they damaged its manpower, both in quality and
numbers.
The Roman army during this time was divided into the high
quality soldiers, called the field force, and the lower quality
soldiers, referred to as the frontier force, who did not fight as much
as the field force. The frontier force was mainly deployed to local
garrisons that were not as volatile as the places where the field forces
fought. Because of the civil wars between the legions and the battles
against outside invaders and enemies of the Western Roman Empire, the
field force was considerably weakened and greatly reduced in number.
The field force had to take second-rate soldiers from the frontier
force, thus lowering the quality of the army. The waning quality of the
Roman army was not its only concern; there were also not a sufficient
number of new soldiers being drafted. all the info is in there thank litpick.com i didnt write this
The answer to your question is
508
Answer:
The correct answer is ''there are consistent differences between and within cultures on these personality styles.''
Explanation:
Individualistic cultures are those in which individual needs and well-being are placed before those of the group or community; furthermore, independence and self-reliance are promoted. In an individualistic culture, decisions, achievements, goals, and desires are often defined as personal, not collective. People who come from cultures of this type consider social prestige, success, dominance, personal wealth as priorities; they are competitive, and more inclined to be creative and to seek new emotions. On the other hand, in collectivist cultures, people tend to define themselves more based on their ties within the group than on the personal characteristics they possess, and the sense of community is valued; there is concern for the well-being of others, concern for social justice, commitment to cultural traditions and customs.
