Answer:
Reducing trade barriers
Explanation:
<u>If governments choose protectionism, they harm citizens who could benefit from the products, services or jobs offered by foreign companies.</u>
If, for example, the “A” government sets <em>tariffs to protect the domestic market</em>, the “B” government <em>could respond with tariffs in retaliation</em>, which would result in both countries being harmed. So, the problem of trade warfare is still represented by a “Prisoner's Dilemma” game because it says that two people, in this case, two governments, can decide not to cooperate even if it goes against the interest of both.
On the other hand, <em>unrestricted free trade could go against governments that develop trade policies based on national economic well-being.</em>
The game's equilibrium solution would be for both countries to opt to reduce their trade barriers through negotiations.
Answer:
Many Social Darwinists embraced laissez-faire capitalism and racism. They believed that government should not interfere in the “survival of the fittest” by helping the poor, and promoted the idea that some races are biologically superior to others.
Social Darwinists believe in “survival of the fittest”—the idea that certain people become powerful in society because they are innately better. Social Darwinism has been used to justify imperialism, racism, eugenics and social inequality at various times over the past century and a half.
In the late 1800s, many Americans enthusiastically embraced Spencer's "Social Darwinism" to justify laissez-faire, or unrestricted, capitalism. In 1859, Charles Darwin published Origin of Species, which explained his theory of animal and plant evolution based on "natural selection."
I believe the last answer because decisions are run through all 3 branch’s before being made official.
Answer:
None of the convention’s goals were met, and the Federalist Party lost popularity.
Explanation:
