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
dmitriy555 [2]
3 years ago
6

Which of the following is a major example of Abraham Lincoln's policy of leniency toward the defeated South?

History
1 answer:
DiKsa [7]3 years ago
5 0

President Lincoln's decision that the southern state governments could reorganize after 10 percent of the voters took a loyalty oath to the union.

You might be interested in
Who spoke out against adding land in the Southwest to the United States? James Polk James Slidell Winfield Scott Ralph Waldo Eme
Romashka [77]
James Polk spoke out against adding land in the southwest to the United States. The correct option among all the options that are given in the question is the first option. He was born on 2nd of November in the year 1795 and died on 15th of June in the year 1849. I hope the answer helps you.
4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
How did the search for religious freedom lead to the settlement of utah?
kupik [55]
Im so sorry i was going to help but i suuuucccckkkkk at history again im sorry and i hope you get your answer :) 
4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
This is the only question I have left on this.
Natasha2012 [34]

Answer:

Explanation:

the excerpt from holes. mr. sir laughed. "you see any guard towers? " "no." "how about an electric fence? " "no, mr. sir." "there's no fence at all, is there? " "no, mr. sir." "you want to run away? " mr. sir asked him. stanley looked back at him, unsure what he meant. "if you want to run away, go ahead, start running. i'm not going to stop you." in this excerpt, the author provides details about the character of mr. sir primarily through what he says. what he does. others’ thoughts. others’ reactions.

8 0
3 years ago
Which of the following is a benefit for Americans as globalization increases? lower prices for manufactured goods higher wages f
Eddi Din [679]

Answer:

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) among Canada, Mexico, and the United States has now been in effect for three years. Globalization advocates, including Bill Clinton, have heralded it as a major step forward for all involved, while the conservative Heritage Foundation says that under NAFTA "trade has increased, U.S. exports and employment levels have risen significantly, and the average living standards of American workers have improved."

Yet the evidence shows the opposite. First, recent research by Kate Bronfenbrenner of Cornell University confirms that globalization shifts bargaining power toward employers and against U.S. workers. Bronfenbrenner found that since the signing of NAFTA more than half of employers faced with union organizing and contract drives have threatened to close their plants in response. And 15% of firms involved in union bargaining have actually closed part or all of their plants—three times the rate during the late 1980s.

Second, NAFTA has caused large U.S. job losses, despite claims by the White House that the United States has gained 90,000 to 160,000 jobs due to trade with Mexico, and by the U.S. Trade Representative that U.S. jobs have risen by 311,000 due to greater trade with Mexico and Canada. The liberal Economic Policy Institute (EPI) points out that the Clinton administration looks only at the effects of exports by the United States, while ignoring increased imports coming from our neighbors. EPI estimates that the U.S. economy has lost 420,000 jobs since 1993 due to worsening trade balances with Mexico and Canada.

Research on individual companies yields similar evidence of large job losses. In 1993 the National Association of Manufacturers released anecdotes from more than 250 companies who claimed that they would create jobs in the United States if NAFTA passed. Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch surveyed 83 of these same companies this year. Trade Watch found that 60 had broken their earlier promises to create jobs or expand U.S. exports, while seven had kept them and 16 were unable or unwilling to provide data.

Among the promise-breakers were Allied Signal, General Electric, Mattel, Proctor and Gamble, Whirlpool, and Xerox, all of whom have laid off workers due to NAFTA (as certified by the Department of Labor's NAFTA Trade Adjustment Assistance program). GE, for example, testified in 1993 that sales to Mexico "could support 10,000 [U.S.] jobs for General Electric and its suppliers," but in 1997 could demonstrate no job gains due to NAFTA.

To see why, let's review recent trends in global trade. At a swift pace in recent decades, barriers to international trade, investment, and production have fallen. Transport and telecommunications have become much cheaper and faster, greatly improving the ability of multinationals to manage globally dispersed activities. Tariff and nontariff barriers have been removed through international agreements, including NAFTA, the European Union, and the World Trade Organization, while the proposed Multilateral Agreement on Investment is looming.

Since the 1970s trade in goods and services has been increasing much faster than world output, the opposite of what happened in the 1950s and 1960s. From 1970 through the mid-1990s, world output grew at a rate of 3% per year, trade volume at 5.7% per year.

For the United States, the ratio of exports and imports to gross domestic product (GDP) changed little over most of the present century, but from 1972 through 1995 it rose from 11% to 24%. By 1990, 36% of U.S. imports came from developing countries compared with 14% in 1970. For the European Union, imports from developing nations grew from 5% to 12% over the same period (the proportions would have been much higher if trade between European nations was excluded, just as interstate trade is excluded from U.S. foreign trade figures).

Multinationals' use of developing nations for production is substantial and growing, especially in Latin America and Asia (excluding Japan). By 1994 it accounted for a third of all trade between U.S. multinational parents and their affiliates, and at least 40% of their worldwide employment.

3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What will happen if the blood types are mixed improperly?
MA_775_DIABLO [31]
The blood with coagulate and cause complete disarray in the body, usually resulting in death.
8 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • List 2 negative impacts of the success of tobacco in Jamestown
    11·1 answer
  • both the Missouri compromise of 1820 and the converse of 1850 settled conflict between the north and south over what issue
    13·2 answers
  • Why did Texas became a slave state after the compromise of 1850
    10·1 answer
  • Why did white southern Democrats disenfranchise black men
    6·1 answer
  • What are three problems of the large cities?
    7·2 answers
  • ASAP HELP PLEASE!!!!!!!!!
    12·1 answer
  • The Zimmermann Telegram and Germany’s use of unrestricted submarine warfare were the leading causes of __________. A. World War
    6·2 answers
  • who was the pope when the by Byzantine Empire requested aid from the church due to the Turkish treat ​
    15·2 answers
  • 21. Explain the rights guaranteed by the 3rd Amendment
    12·1 answer
  • Ok this is my second question someone PLEASE help!
    8·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!