Answer:
I'm pretty sure flooding along rivers created good farmland.
Explanation:
When rivers flood, they put silt onto soil, making it more fertile. When the flooding stops, it makes amazing farmland.
Hope this helps!
Answer:
The answer is: "People move to growing cities to take available jobs."
Explanation:
In order to know the answer, it is best to learn what<u> "urbanization" </u>means.
Urbanization- This word is defined as the process of making an area more urban (town or city). An area becomes more urbanized when there is a population increase. They are directly proportional to each other. The higher the number of people going to one area, the more likely the area becomes urbanized.
A population increase means more people need to look for more jobs. <u>So, they move to a place where they can easily find a job. This is the reason why they move to growing cities. </u>This affects the growth of the economy.
<u>Economic growth</u> means there's an increase in the value of goods and services being produced by an economy over time.
Answer:
The correct response is Option D: New industrial machines increased the number of goods that factories could make.
Explanation:
After the Civil War, the United States grew rapidly and quickly became an industrial nation. This growth was fueled by : Innovations in technology, and the development of large-scale agriculture, and the federal government itself expanded. There was also tensions regarding immigration and federal Indian policy and the late 1800s there was increased demands for workers and women rights. Many inventions in the late 1880s helped to fuel the growth of cities. Thomas Edison’s invention of the electric light bulb made it more practical to light factories and homes and extended the workday as it allowed people to work and accomplish things at night as well.
Answer:
the correct answer is true
Explanation:
step my step
Scarcity is the fundamental challenge that all individuals and nations must confront. Everyone faces some limitations, so we all have to make choices where we limit or allow ourselves to something.
Economists generally recognize four types of economic systems traditional, traditional, command, market and mixed.
A traditional economic system is shaped by tradition. The work that people do, the goods and services they provide, how they exchange resources… all tend to follow a pattern. The traditional system is bad at addressing scarcity because scarcity is formed off of new requirements people have through the ages and a traditional system would not evolve just as our requirements would.
In a planned economy, the government controls the economy. The state decides how to use and distribute resources. The government regulates prices and wages; it may even determine what sorts of work individuals do.
Socialism is a prime example of a planned economy. Socialism does not work because it is not consistent with the fundamental principles of human behavior. The failure of socialism in countries around the world can be traced to one critical defect: it is a system that ignores incentives.
Market economies allow all economic decisions to be made by individuals. The unrestrained interactions between individuals and companies in the marketplace determine what happens to all the good and resources.Individuals choose how to invest their personal resources and individuals decide what to consume. Within a pure market economy, the government is entirely absent from economic affairs.
A mixed economic system combines elements of the market and command economy. Many economic decisions are made in the market by individuals. But the government also plays a role in the allocation and distribution of resources.
If scarcity is looked at on a macro level, the best economic system is mixed because it allows the government to also plays a role in the allocation and distribution of resources, while the individuals still stay happy because they have some control. The only problem is the eternal question of what the right mix between the public and private sectors of the economy should be.
There is no point to look at it on a micro level because almost no country is small enough to be considered on that level.
