Answer:
a. proved essential for the success of Grant’s attrition strategy.
Explanation:
The Union is known as the "North" and the Confederacy is known as the "South".
At the event of the American Civil War, the Union also know as the "United States of America" under the presidentship of Abraham Lincoln was opposed by 11 southern states known as the "Confederate States of America" under the presidentship of Jefferson Davis.
Abraham Lincoln believed that he could win over the Confederacy states until and unless he have control over the border states, mainly Maryland.
Union's man power was more as they had nearly 20 states associated with them.
The Union in order to win over the Confederacy States made strategies to gradually reduced the power of the Confederacy States.
Thus the advantage that the Union's soldier or manpower have over the Confederacy has proved to be essential for the success of Grant’s attrition strategy.
Hence the answer is
a. proved essential for the success of Grant’s attrition strategy.
Studies show us that multitasking is not effective and makes us more prone to error. That's why multitasking for humans doesn't work.
<h3>Human multitasking</h3>
Multitasking is doing multiple work at once. Human brain, our brain, is incapable of performing multiple tasks at the same time. This happens even after extensive long training. It's because our brain isn't hardwired to do multiple tasks. Study on neurological science shows us that the human brain is not able to focus on two things at once. The other study shows that the human brain can only do two tasks at the same time, because it only has two hemispheres available for the tasks.
#SPJ4
Answer: Person-situation controversy
Explanation:
Person situation controversy is type of debate which takes place between determining whether situation factor or person is more responsible for the impacting its behavior in different situation and environment.
Personality traits are the characteristics that remain the same in different situation and condition for responding and expressing feelings. Therefore, influence of person and condition is observed in such controversy.
Answer:
No, it violates antitrust laws
Explanation:
Antitrust law as applicable to Real Estate, is a law that is made to protect stakeholders: buyers, sellers or other parties involved in a potential or actual contract relationship from practices that may be considered as void such as price fixing (often times lowering of prices), rigging of bids, allocation of customers or markets, running of multiple listing services individually or collectively, and group boycotts.
Hence, in this case, this is a case of price-fixing where by two participants on the same side, have agreed to fix a price, in which the 5% may have imposed high prices on consumers. Thus, it is considered illegal, and violates antitrust law.
The element of teaching that is exhibited in this situation is compromise.
<h3>What is compromise?</h3>
This is a situation where two different sides decide to settle a dispute or argument by conceding.
In this scenario, the two teachers had different approaches on what they needed to do.
But M.r Jackson conceded and agreed to go first with the idea of the other teacher.
Read more on compromise here
brainly.com/question/25668660
