Answer:
Health and Safety
Environmental laws protect the health and safety of humans and the environment. For example, the Clean Air Act limits emissions of pollutants, and the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act prohibits dumping of waste into U.S. ocean waters without a permit. (See References 1 and 4) Without such laws, businesses and individuals might do whatever was most convenient or cost-effective for them, rather than acting for the good of society and the environment.
Innovation
Stricter environmental laws tend to increase innovative environmentally friendly technology, writes Frank Wijen in "A Handbook of Globalization and Environmental Policy." (See Reference 5, Page 216) The demand for sustainable technology rises as companies and individuals must follow stricter environmental regulations, leading researchers and clean energy entrepreneurs to focus on developing such technologies. Ultimately, this increases the prominence of sustainable technologies, making them more accessible.
Costs
Businesses may see certain environmental laws in a negative light if they must adapt their practices and increase spending to comply with regulations. Individuals may feel inconvenienced by particular laws as well, such as a new law against fishing in a favorite spot. Conducting a cost-benefit analysis of environmental laws often proves challenging, as negative effects of not implementing these laws -- such as death, illness and ecosystem destruction -- cannot always be easily quantified in monetary terms. (See Reference 2) However, becoming more environmentally friendly may actually save businesses and individuals money in the long term, particularly by reducing waste and energy usage, despite the cost of the initial investment.
Oversights
Environmental laws that impose regulations without considering their impacts on local communities come with a serious disadvantage: lack of local support. For example, a law that commands people to stay out of a protected natural area, without recognizing that people rely on this ecosystem for their own daily needs, may not only constitute a human rights violation, but may actually backfire, says the Center for International Forestry Research. Community participation in ecosystem management helps to ensure compliance with regulations, reports CIFOR.
Explanation:
I'm not sure if you're looking for a specific answer, but in my perspective...
They are similar in that they <em>introduce </em>a particular topic. Usually both <em>establish </em>the "playing field" the topic will be discussed on. This included boundaries and opinions etc.
They are different in that argumentative thesis statements are <em>one sided </em>and the it's purpose is to <em>defend</em> their argument. They usually begin by introducing a dispute or a question and <u>establishing their position</u>/what they believe.
Explanatory thesis statements usually<u> lay down the foundation for discussion</u> and introduce in <em>detail </em>what the reader and author will ponder. They <em>explain.</em>
Answer:
Native Americans and colonists
Hitler's rise to power, from an economic standpoint, was really caused by the Treaty of Versailles. The Treaty of Versailles was passed after World War I and blamed Germany for beginning of World War I. Along with this, Germany was responsible for paying reparations to countries like Great Britain and France. This caused the German economy to crash, as hyperinflation kicked in. This allowed for the rise of a strong leader who could turn the German economy around.
As Hitler worked his way up through the political ranks, the size of the Nazi party grew. Once Hitler was in complete control of the German government, he used this power to get rid of all other political parties in the country. He was able to do this through the use of his own secret police.
Hitler's reign could have been curtailed during 1939. However, the Munich Agreement allowed Hitler to gain control over parts of Czechoslovakia. This only fueled his aggression for land and political power.