ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ
<span>ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ</span>
The correct answer is the following.
The scenario that best depicts how power operates at the micro-level is "Husbands and wives often argue about the division of labor within the household."
Power and control are concepts that are always applicable to the corporate world and politics. Or so they say.
However, these concepts can be applied on every level of society, including the micro-level.
That is the case of personal relationships, marriage, and the family environment.
So it is true that power and control operate in the family environment when husbands and wives often argue about the division of labor within the household. The wife or the husband -according to their personalities- want t to be the ones who have the final saying in the decisions at home. And as we can understand, there are serious arguing and discussions to solve many daily issues that exemplify the way they try to maintain control of any determined situation.
Answer:
The inference that is best supported by the passage is: A. Prior to the "Click it or Ticket" law, motorist could not be stopped simply for not waring a seatbelt."
Explanation:
In the passage is very clear that in the new law motorist can be now pulled over and ticketed for not wearing seatbelts (later in the passage it implies that's the reason why lawyers and citizens' gorups are protesting), which implies that before the state legislature passed the law this was not a reason to be pulled over even though this is not stated in the passage, the entire text circles around the novelty of pulling over motorist for not wearing seatbelt, therefore the best option is A especially because that is the main idea of the text.
Answer:
1. The author uses the words "undefined", "unbounded" and "immense" to describe the powers of the constitution.
2. Upset: it makes the Congress even more powerful than it’s previous long list of expressed powers
3. A Bill of Rights is necessary to protect the rights of citizens. The proposed Constitution does not do enough.
4. Yes he does, and it matters because if you don’t trust the people in power you wouldn’t have a real nation.
5.He seems more like an Anti-Federalist.
Part Two
1. Unnecessary and dangerous
2. From the Federalist No.84
3. No because he believes that its unnecessary and not needed in the constitution.
4. That the bill of rights is pointless and not realistic for the American people.
5 He is defiantly Anti-Federalist; He goes against everything Federalism is for.
