Answer: This is a act against humanity with he Venezuelan world and Nicolas Maduro bad decisions as a president.
An act against humanity happened in Venezuela. Nicolas Maduro created a climate of terror in order to repress opposition to his presidency and the international community. Protestants are in the streets with guns destroying the city. Nicolas Maduro has made Venezuela a savage country and made himself a bad president. Protestants called for new elections and more than 100 people were killed in clashes with securities forces. The government of Venezuela is letting people destroy the country and act against humanity.
~ SavTheDory
Brainliest please
Answer:
Insight
Explanation:
the capacity to gain an accurate and deep understanding of someone or something
The biggest difference between options and futures exists that futures contracts need that the transaction specified by the contract must take place on the date specified. Options, on the other hand, provide the buyer of the contract the right — but not the obligation — to execute the transaction.
<h3>What is the difference between futures contract and options?</h3>
A futures contract is put into effect on the specified date. The buyer buys the underlying asset on this date. In the meantime, the buyer of an options contract is free to execute the agreement at any point before the expiration date.
You may therefore purchase the asset anytime you believe the circumstances are favorable. A futures contract gives the holder the option to purchase or sell a certain item at a predetermined price on a predetermined future date. Options allow the option to purchase or sell a certain asset at a specific price on a specific date, but not the obligation to do so.
Hence, The biggest difference between options and futures exists that futures contracts need that the transaction specified by the contract must take place on the date specified. Options, on the other hand, provide the buyer of the contract the right — but not the obligation — to execute the transaction.
To learn more about futures contract refer to:
brainly.com/question/1193397
#SPJ4
Answer:
Chief Justice Roger Taney declared Missouri Compromise to be illegal and unconstitutional.
Explanation:
The Missouri Compromise seen was a crucial agreement to balance the power in Congress between slave and free states. The purpose of the Missouri Compromise was to settle the dispute. As a result, it banned slavery in the north (Louisiana territory) from the southern line of latitude 36 degrees 30'. It was during The Dred Scott v. Sandford judgment by the Supreme Court found that the Missouri Compromise was illegal. Roger Taney affirmed that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional because Congress had no authority to forbid slavery in territories. To justify his statement, he mentions about the Fifth Amendment that gives citizens (slave master) a right to have property rights.
Http://classroom.synonym.com/differences-similarities-between-byzantine-islamic-empires-7349.html
