Answer: A. a disagreement between the states over representation in Congress.
The main disagreement was over whether representation would be the same for all states, or based on a state's population size. Then there was also a question, for basing representation on population size, about whether slaves counted in a state's population or not.
The Great Compromise and the Three-Fifths Compromise were worked out during the United States Constitutional Convention in 1787 in order to resolve these issues.
- The Great Compromise resolved a dispute between small population states and large population states. Initially, a unicameral (one-chamber) legislature was envisioned. The large population states wanted representation in Congress to be based on a state's population size. The smaller states feared this would lead to unchecked dominance by the big states; they wanted all states to receive the same amount of representation. The Great Compromise created a bicameral (two-chamber) legislature. Representation in the House of Representatives would be based on population. In the Senate, all states would have the same amount of representation, by two Senators.
- The Three-Fifths Compromise was a way of accounting (somewhat) for the population of slaves in states that permitted slavery. For taxation and representation purposes, the question was whether slaves should count in the population figures. (They were not considered voting citizens at that time.) The Three-Fifths Compromise said that three out of every five slaves could be counted when determining a state's population size for determining how many seats that state would receive in the House of Representatives.
Answer:I don’t speak Spanish sry
Explanation:
The answer would be, B. there was a more prosperous economy.
Hope it helps.
Look at the chart that I have attached. The low point was between 55 or 60 to 381. When you look at something like Bitcoin, that doesn't look like it was very much, but there are two things that you really have to keep in mind.
1. Most people had only about 10% of the price of the stock covered. What that means is that if a stock cost 100 dollars, most people had only 10 dollars holding it down. The rest was put up by the bank. The market was doing such crazy things that I don't even think the banks checked into your credit. The stock was holding down what you owed. The bank only got its share when you sold. Preposterous!!! It sure was.
2. The second thing is that the numbers I've given you were the Dow Jones Industrial Average. That's the cream of the cream on the NY stock exchange. Who knows what was going on with companies that were not that big. They were what the economic writers would have called "Good Speculations," which translated into "go mortgage your house, sell your furniture, back up the truck (and then sell it too) and buy xzy. You'll never be broke again."
That by the way is why bitcoin and all its relatives is so dangerous.