I'm gonna have to say A. I'm not sure though. Hope this helps! Have a good day!
Answer:
During the 1920s, Congress supported domestic producers with a protective trade policy.
Explanation:
We can infer from the information in the question that during the 1920s, and even in 1930, Congress passed several laws that aimed at protecting American domestic producers from foreign competition.
These protectionist laws were the tariffs that are listed in the question. A tariff is simply a tax on foreign goods, and are the most commonly used protectionist policy.
A young person may wanna become an apprentice to learn and or gain information about something they like or something they want to do for a job when they are older.
hoped this helped ᵔᴥᵔ
Answer:
this is in your text book
Explanation:
The economy operates according to the law of supply and demand for goods and services. According to this theory, the interaction between supply and demand for a good or service fits and the vector of adjustment is price.
If the price is high, there is more supply than demand. If the price is low, there is more demand than supply. If demand increases, price increases and supply increases. If demand falls, the price falls. That is, the price makes the interaction. There will be a moment where the quantity offered is exactly equal to the quantity demanded, at which point the price practiced is the equilibrium price.
So if an economy is in equilibrium at a time and then the price charged is higher than the equilibrium price, it means that demand has gotten higher than supply.
<u>However, none of the alternatives would explain why a price is charged above the equilibrium price.</u> <u>The answer is the reverse of what is written in alternative (A)</u>. The truth is this: As the quantity demanded rises, the price rises above the equilibrium price. <u>This is the answer</u>.
The alternative (B) is true, although it does not answer the question of the problem. If prices rise, demand falls. This is because the high price discourages consumption.
BTW, I'm an economist and I'm sure.