Answer:
I personally think the Senate should be elected and that it is to stay that way. Government would be too powerful since the source of it's power is The People. If the people cannot directly vote and just have to watch as they're chosen in front of them, they might have to overthrow the "tyranny".
Explanation:
"Voters have elected their senators in the privacy of the voting booth since 1913. The framers of the Constitution, however, did not intend senators to be elected in this way and included in Article I, section 3, "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, chosen by the legislature thereof for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote." The election of delegates to the Constitutional Convention established the precedent for state selection. The framers believed that in electing senators, state legislatures would cement their tie with the national government, which would increase the chances for ratifying the Constitution. They also expected that senators elected by state legislatures would be able to concentrate on the business at hand without pressure from the populace," as it says in senate.gov.
This means that Senate is usually elected. They should stay it that way- it's as if changing an amendment, which would be a long and stressful process. Which means it will never happen. The People are the source of the government's power and they should stay as it otherwise the US' gov't may be seen as too powerful.
Answer:
c) heuristic.
Explanation:
When asked to indicate whether San Diego or San Antonio has more inhabitants, more German university students answered correctly than did American university students. This best illustrated the adaptive value of a <u>heuristic.</u>
Heuristic is any method of learning or self discovery that is applied in achieving immediate or short-term goal. Heuristics can be mental shortcuts that ease the cognitive load of making a decision.
The German students were able to apply heuristic learning approach getting the right answer.
WORK
CITY PLANNING
<span>In the 19th century, the population continued to grow unabated, doubling between 1801 and the 1820's and then doubling again between then and 1851, to 400,000 souls. This was phenomenal growth transforming Manchester into Britain’s second city. Manchester continued to grow steadily down to the end of the century. </span>
WORK- <span>Young men and women poured in from the countryside, eager to find work in the new factories and mills. The mills paid relatively high wages and they also employed large numbers of children. As a consequence, families migrating to the city often saw a considerable rise in their incomes. But not all aspects of life in the factories were pleasant. The rise in child labour was of course undesirable from the perspective of child welfare.
CITY PLANNING- </span>Better wages were undoubtedly the greatest attraction of city life, but the higher incomes came at a price. City planning was in its infancy and much of the new workers’ housing was erected with little regard to quality.
Because manufacturers could pay them lower wages, since they were kids
