Answer:
In any regard, supporters of <em>laissez-faire </em>governmental policies were often advocates for the "free market". They would suggest that federal or state involvement in business would stagnate and decelerate the growth of the economy. The "invisible hand" of the market does not actually exist, but this argument would be made in order to support the assertion that government involvement was not required. In reality, significant economic downfalls of the past could have been avoided, had the governments of "unregulated business" nations played a more active role. Claims such as these were made for the purpose of promoting a self-sustaining economy, even when such a thing cannot coexist with financial disparity.
I hope this helped you understand the motives behind <em>laissez-faire </em> business and government policies. Blessings to you.
Archaeology is the answer
The relationship was not good because they disagreed about where the Texas- Mexico border.
The war—in which U.S. forces were consistently victorious—resulted in the United States' acquisition of more than 500,000 square miles (1,300,000 square km) of Mexican territory extending westward from the Rio Grande to the Pacific Ocean
Many women were the victims of the alcohol abuse of their husbands.
They also saw themselves as the protectors of children who were also negatively impacted by the alcohol
<span>abuse of their fathers and bosses. Many temperance societies supported other causes that were important to women (e.g. suffrage, ending child labor, improving public education, promoting workplace safety.)
</span>
The answer is monopoly because held most of the banana production in Central America. This company is also describe as Exploitative neo-colonialism. It has a staying power and influence, it is also created monopolies governance and politics. It had long impact on the economic and political of many Latin American countries.
