Answer:
Bacon proposed the scientific method.
Explanation:
Bacon invented the microscope. hope this helps you :)
Explanation:
Jefferson did't consider in the stronger Constitution of 1789, and didn't really think the Federal govt required to help control the economy. Hamilton genuinely believed in such stuff, and the world has adopted his vision, because the nation has struggled any time we tried to do without Federal support with debt and credit.Also, fiscal policy would include borrowing money to make adjustments in the country.
Europeans<span> especially wanted to get fine </span>Chinese goods<span> such as silk, tea and pottery.</span>
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Although there are no options attached we can say the following.
Do the economic benefits of free trade outweigh the social costs?
Not really, and it all depends on the perspective.
From the big companies and industrial side, free trade has been a success. Free trade has allowed thousands of companies to export their goods with cero import tariffs, benefiting the income. It has allowed multinational companies to go abroad and establishing branches in different parts of the world, basically in underdeveloped nations.
Once there, they paid very low salaries, much less than what they should have paid in their former countries, That is a reason why they moved to underdeveloped countries. So cheap labor is one reason. And other these multinational companies freely exploit the many raw materials and natural resources of that underdeveloped country.
Meanwhile, free trade makes rich people and corporations richer, and poor countries and poor people continue to be as poor as they have always been. No serious progress at all,
Answer:
No
Explanation:
Pam is not violating the law of demand. The law of demand suggests that the supply of a product varies with demand. When demand increases, price increases, when demand decreases, price decreases. Notice that Pam has decreased hamburger consumption, meaning it has contributed to the decrease in demand. If the demand for hamburgers has decreased, it is only natural that the price of hamburgers will decrease. It should be noted that even if the hamburger price had risen and Pam no longer consumed hamburgers, the law of demand would still not be violated. This is because the law of demand takes into account aggregate demand (from all consumers) rather than individual demand. So Pam could have stopped eating hamburger as a matter of preference for another item.
