Each state would have two delegates in the Senate, while representation in the House of Representatives would be based on population. Finally, the delegates agreed to the "Great Compromise," also known as the Connecticut Compromise.
Their so-called Great Compromise (also known as the Connecticut Compromise after its architects, Connecticut delegates Roger Sherman and Oliver Ellsworth) established a dual system of congressional representation. Each state would be assigned a number of seats in the House of Representatives based on its population.
The Great Compromise of 1787 gave larger states population-based representation in the lower house, while smaller states gained equal representation in the upper house.
To know more about Great Compromise of 1787 here
brainly.com/question/8242538
#SPJ4
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Some people think that if the government had greater control in regulating the economy, the Great Depression would not have happened. Others disagree. They believe that a free market economy lets consumer choices have the greatest say in the direction of the economy and produces the best outcomes for the most people. I agree with the first one because if you totally allow the market and people to dictate the flow of the economy, then you have those kinds of consequences. After the consumerism behavior of the "Roaring 1920s," most people bought things on credit. But the lack of some kind of government regulation took things to the extreme and that is when the United States stock market crashed on October 29, 1929, beginning the Great Depression.
I think the best position is a balance between government regulation is special or extreme conditions and letting the free market dictate the economy.
"They became League of Nations mandates".. hope this helped! :)
A. The US made the Gadsden Purchase.
The US never sold Texas. US won the war. Mexican cession was the US taking land.
