First, we must note the difference. The federal system used under the USA allows the government to be branched, so that each area of the land is allowed to focus on their own problems, with a general government to help enforce, supply, and be the 'parent' of the smaller governments. In this way, it eases the tasks needed for a central government, which in turn can focus on national interest and over-sea policies. This type of government also has three branches, and with the passage of the checks-and-balances, allows the three to share equal power and to make sure that none of the branches become to powerful (in becoming a unitary government).
In a unitary system, however, the central government (national) is the only power and only gives its power to those they wish to have. The country is only governed by one branch, the executive branch, which also incorporates all other branches together too. However, there are many sub-branches, but they do not have the same rights (as they do not have checks-and-balances, as in the federal system). These rights are given by the central government, who has the final say in all things.
hope this helps
Answer:
The Safavids were prominent in Northwestern Iran
It could be A, it would bring georgia to work harder to boost the economic to help the people who are at the olympic's for their state
This question could be answered differently depending on which Roosevelt<span> you are referring to ...</span>Roosevelt<span> attacked trust and the Hepburn Act in 1906 was </span>created<span> to ... His ideas of </span>relief,recovery<span>, and </span>reform were<span> then </span>put<span> into play through the New ... The </span>Public<span> Works administration recruited any </span>people<span> willing to aid </span>
