Between 1820 and 1850, Southern lawmakers consistently opposed protective tariffs because these tariffs increased the cost of imports.
3) increased the cost of imports
<u>Explanation:</u>
Southern states, for example, South Carolina battled that the duty was unlawful and was against the more current protectionist taxes, as they would need to pay yet Northern states favoured them since they fortified their modern based economy.
The motivation behind this levy was to go about as a solution for the contention made by the Tariff of 1828. The defensive Tariff of 1828 was basically made to secure the quickly developing industry-based economy of the North.
The Tariff of 1816, set a 20-25% expense on every single outside great. Prior to the War of 1812, obligations arrived at the midpoint of about 12.5%. The Significance of the Tariff of 1816: The Tariff of 1816 helped American organizations contend with British and European production lines.
here several things that fruit merchants and the u.s. foreign-policy makers have in common:
They both participated in economic imperialism.
They both wanted to control the market they were in, to be the exclusive provider of product/policy.
They both used economic power to spread US influence abroad.
All of the thins above,were being done in order to obtain the maximum profit for themselves from all of their operations
C. OAU. Organization of African Unity (OAU) had nothing to do with America.
Answer:
Yes, citizens should definitely be allowed to overturn government mandates. The reason is that political authority, according to most contemporary political theories, are based on the idea of the social contract and the consent of the governed.
These two ideas state that governments derive their power from mutual agreement with the citizens they rule, and that as result, it is citizens who have ultimate sovereignty, and this gives them the right to overthrow a government or oppose its mandates.
