The prosperity of the 1920s led to new patterns of consumption, or purchasing consumer goods like radios, cars, vacuums, beauty products or clothing. The expansion of credit in the 1920s allowed for the sale of more consumer goods and put automobiles within reach of average Americans.
You can use this as reasoning for it being a positive.
When Steve and Kathy divorced, they agreed to share the responsibility for the care and raising of their children. In the context of child custody, this arrangement exemplifies joint custody.
What is joint custody?
Sharing of parental responsibilities for the child is included in joint custody. Joint custody involves both parents actively participating in the child's upbringing, as opposed to exclusive custody, when one parent has complete control. Physical and legal custody might be shared equally, as well as both.
What are the disadvantages of joint custody?
Youngsters can experience alienation and confusion because they are frequently in a condition of limbo and are continually moving between their parents' homes. Additionally, keeping up two homes for the child's needs is frequently very difficult for parents.
Learn more about Joint Custody: brainly.com/question/9117788
#SPJ4
Answer:
<u>Interpersonal racism (personally mediated) occurs between individuals. This is the bias that occurs when individuals interact with others and their personal racial beliefs affect their public interactions. Institutional racism occurs within institutions and systems of power.</u>
i think it would be C the reason for this is being that the definition of a quota is a limit on trade,and the question is asking for a way to limit it. an embargo limits all trade between a country, and a tariff raises the tax on trade and why would you want to decrease the safety standards? these are my reasons for it being : C. A quota on imports and exports
hope this helps
Jean Jacques Rousseau would most likely agree with speaker number four:
governments derive their powers from the consent of the people
Rousseau believed that the people coming together collectively to ensure and agree on government is the only form of legitimacy (Social Contract Theory).
