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
krek1111 [17]
4 years ago
11

What is the difference between liberty and tyanny

History
1 answer:
Triss [41]4 years ago
7 0

Answer:

liberty:-Your State Of Country Society Is totally In stabilizing,peace and safe condition.

<h3>by the way, did you mean "tyranny"?if it's,alright then(could be typo spell there.) </h3>

tyranny:-Your Country is trully unsafe, political issues doesn't get along-well,society state could get too much problem but doesn't care about it at all.*Ignored*

You might be interested in
How were the First and Second Great Awakenings similar? How were they different?
IceJOKER [234]
They were similar because they both had to deal with religion. However, they are different because the second great awakening explained how you could change if you went to heaven or not.
6 0
4 years ago
HELP ME!!
natka813 [3]
(This isn’t going to be an actual paragraph answer - don’t put this as your answer, this is just some guidance) I don’t know if you’re familiar with Machiavelli’s “The Prince” but in the text Machiavelli says that all a man really care about is his property (or something like that, I’d fact check it/get an actual quote). Locke very much so supported a absolute monarch and “The Prince” is essentially a guide of sorts for absolute rulers -> Locke was a fan of Machiavelli’s work. Thomas Jefferson on the other hand did not support an absolute ruler (he was of English decent, like other American colonists, and England was a constitutional monarchy, hince the American constitution/government) and therefore probably didn’t support Machiavelli’s work but he was a fan of Locke (a lot of the founding fathers were fans of enlightenment thinkers, John Locke was an elightened thinker) so Jefferson took his ideas from Locke.
5 0
4 years ago
Reward given to heroic soldiers in Mali
LUCKY_DIMON [66]
National honor of the trousers
6 0
3 years ago
What is ‘de-industrialisation’? What was its impact on the Indian Economy during the colonial period?
vaieri [72.5K]
<span><span>A straightforward long-term decline in the output of manufactured goods or in employment in the manufacturing sector.</span><span>A shift from manufacturing to the service sectors, so that manufacturing has a lower share of total employment. Such a shift may occur even if manufacturing employment is growing in absolute terms</span><span>That manufactured goods comprise a declining share of external trade, so that there is a progressive failure to achieve a sufficient surplus of exports over imports to maintain an economy in external balance</span><span>A continuing state of balance of trade deficit (as described in the third definition above) that accumulates to the extent that a country or region is unable to pay for necessary imports to sustain further production of goods, thus initiating a further downward spiral of economic decline</span></span>

The colonization of different Asian countries by European powers in the 18th–20th centuries led to a fall in their manufacturing and global GDP share, affecting mainly India, China and countries in Southeast Asia.[1]

<span>Explanations<span>[edit]</span></span>

Theories that predict or explain deindustrialization have a long intellectual lineage. Rowthorn (1992) argues that Marx's theory of declining (industrial) profit may be regarded as one of the earliest. This theory argues that technological innovation enables more efficient means of production, resulting in increased physical productivity, i.e., a greater output of use value per unit of capital invested. In parallel, however, technological innovations replace people with machinery, and the organic composition of capital increases. Assuming only labor can produce new additional value, this greater physical output embodies a smaller value and surplus value. The average rate of industrial profit therefore declines in the longer term.

Rowthorn and Wells (1987) distinguish between deindustrialization explanations that see it as a positive process of, for example, maturity of the economy, and those that associate deindustrialization with negative factors like bad economic performance. They suggest deindustrialization may be both an effect and a cause of poor economic performance.

Pitelis and Antonakis (2003) suggest that, to the extent that manufacturing is characterized by higher productivity, this leads, all other things being equal, to a reduction in relative cost of manufacturing products, thus a reduction in the relative share of manufacturing (provided manufacturing and services are characterized by relatively inelastic demand). Moreover, to the extent that manufacturing firms downsize through, e.g., outsourcing, contracting out, etc., this reduces manufacturing share without negatively influencing the economy. Indeed, it potentially has positive effects, provided such actions increase firm productivity and performance.

George Reisman (2002) identified inflation as a contributor to deindustrialization. In his analysis, the process of fiat money inflation distorts the economic calculations necessary to operate capital-intensive manufacturing enterprises, and makes the investments necessary for sustaining the operations of such enterprises unprofitable.

Institutional arrangements have also contributed to deindustrialization such as economic restructuring. With breakthroughs in transportation, communication and information technology, a globalized economy that encouraged foreign direct investment, capital mobility and labor migration, and new economic theory's emphasis on specialized factor endowments, manufacturing moved to lower-cost sites and in its place service sector and financial agglomerations concentrated in urban areas (Bluestone & Harrison 1982, Logan & Swanstrom 1990).

The term de-industrialization crisis has been used to describe the decline of labor-intensive industry in a number of countries and the flight of jobs away from cities. One example is labor-intensive manufacturing. After free-trade agreements were instituted with less developed nations in the 1980s and 1990s, labor-intensive manufacturers relocated production facilities to third world countries with much lower wages and lower standards. In addition, technological inventions that required less manual labor, such as industrial robots, eliminated many manufacturing jobs.

4 0
4 years ago
What role did geography play in the development of the colonies
nataly862011 [7]
<span>Geography affect everything we do, even today. As an example, industry developed first in New England because of the fall line. The fall line is where you start to get hill big enough to run mills.</span>
3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Why did the development of time zones make train schedules more reliable
    15·1 answer
  • Which of the following countries is the BEST example of a highly planned command economy
    12·1 answer
  • Of the following points, which was NOT a factor that explains future European dominance over the Islamic regions?
    8·1 answer
  • Explain how the Nadir affected African Americans
    8·2 answers
  • Which is one of the causes of the first gulf war?
    14·2 answers
  • What is the source of most of the continent's electricity?
    5·2 answers
  • In seventeenth century England, the rise in population generated an increased demand for which of these?
    15·1 answer
  • How did the events of September 11 change domestic policy in the United States? Discuss at least three changes.
    11·2 answers
  • What the phrase witch hunt means
    8·2 answers
  • ..............................................................
    10·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!