During the great depression the prices of goods went DOWN, and that made consumers hoard hard cash because they felt the longer they waited the more prices would FALL and this restriction of supply was paradoxically making it more attractive to hoard cash, king of like a monopoly on the supply of money.
On the other hand speculators went bankrupt as deflation made the price of the lender's assets LESS than the value of their loan, which decreased their equity, which meant even if they sold all of their assets they could not pay off their loan, which made the BANKS lose a part of their money, and as the demand for hard cash rose that led more banks to go bankrupt, which in turn led more savers to get their assets in hard cash, paradoxically increasing the rate of bank failure.
My theory is that to stop this paradox from continuing is to cause inflation by literally "making" money, adding it to the Government balance, and that this should have been done immediately. Normal Governments do this all the time during recession, usually in the form of monetary policy by lowering rates and taxes to increase the supply of money in the economy (during boom years they increase taxes and interest rates to restrict the supply of cash and limit inflation). But during the great depression doing this was not enough, lowering rates and taxes was not enough, so in my opinion they should have literally printed off more money, which could then be used for infrastructure programs, which increases supply of money so it was not attractive to hoard money and thus increase supply more, while also increasing the value of properties and so increasing equity and stopping bankruptcies, and in the end this might lead to short term inflation, this could be stopped by higher taxes and rates, and then the Government can permanently remove the money from circulation. The only downside of this system is that it won’t punish the financially “special” people as to dissuade them from being so irresponsible, so the Government may have to adopt an asset tax(?) or something like that so the Government can reimburse, if only a little, the sensible people, as well as implement policy to stop banks from funding such speculation And Please don't be childish and report me I hope this helps
The is the Aztecs indigenous American civilization developed the largest and most densely populated capital city
Among women who are depressed in widowhood,<u> financial strain </u>appears to be the biggest burden.
While the death of a spouse is emotionally devastating and can affect family finances particularly if the spouse is the breadwinner, women more than men are found to be especially affected.
One reason is that in a heterosexual marriage, the husband tends to be the main income earner. Studies have found that the household income for widows decline by about 37 percent after the death of her spouse. The assets of widows also tend to decline more than widowers.
Often, wives have been less involved in managing family finances, filing taxes, dealing with life insurance policies, etc. and some do not even have their own accounts. This restricts their financial independence if they enter widowhood.
To learn more about challenges of widowhood: brainly.com/question/9888519
#SPJ4
The predicted outcome of an experiment or an educated guess about what is controlling a behavior is called a hypothesis. It is a proposed statement or explanation for a certain phenomenon or events. For it to be considered as a scientific hypothesis, it should be capable of testing. Usually, hypothesis are based from observations of the past by the scientists that were not explained thoroughly with the existing scientific theories. These statements usually are created to predict or foresee what is the outcome of a experiment or a research.Example would be that "If I would give a plant unlimited supply of light from the sun, then this particular plant would grow to its largest size possible."
