Explanation:
Labor markets in capitalist economies are fundamentally tilted against individual workers’ ability to bargain effectively with employers. Policy does not have to be rigged for employers to give them particular clout in labor markets; instead, the very nature of these labor markets gives them clout. In the past, when economic growth was broadly shared across the population, it was because policymakers understood this basic asymmetry and used policy levers to bolster the leverage and bargaining power of workers. Conversely, recent decades’ rise of inequality and anemic wage growth has resulted from a stripping away of these policy bulwarks to workers’ labor market power.
I believe the answer is A
The Great Compromise solved the issue of representation by putting the ideas of large(Virginia) states and small( New Jersey) states together. This compromise started off by keeping a two house Congress which were the House of Representatives and the Senate. The House of Representatives came from the large states plan, and the Senate came from the small states plan. The first house represented the people, and it involved a number of representatives based on population of the state. The second house represented the states, and each of the states will have two senators that were elected by their legislature which constructed equal representation.
The "American standard of living" completely transformed during the mind-twentieth century,
specifically the 1950s. It was a decade of reverence for the esteemed economic system of capitalism
after a decade of horrendous war. Coming out of the Second World War, the 1950s symbolized a
new period of ultimate economic expansion, relatively stable costs and prices, and a lowering
unemployment rate- all leading up to a "golden age of capitalism" and an increased "American
standard of living". (Foner 991) This increased standard of living only came through however, due to
increasing wages for the common man and average citizen. Between 1946 and 1960, the nation's
gross product was merely doubled and because of that, this new generation of Americans was finally
better off than their parents and previous ancestors. As Foner points out, "about 60 percent of
Americans enjoyed what the government defined as a middle-class standard of living." (991) In all
facets of life, nutrition, shelter, income, education, and even leisure, the majority of Americans were
better off. Most of these middle-class Americans now had money to spare, or used that money to
enjoy the finer innovations that came along with this new standard, including television, airconditioning,
and even air travel. In the end, not only did the poverty rate in America decrease during
this decade, but also the basic standard of living for the average American was drastically advanced
<span>simultaneously.</span>
