Legally, property other than land, including both tangible property and intangible property, is considered personal property.
Any mobile or intangible asset with a value that can be possessed by a person and isn't classified as real property. Personal property refers to consumer and non-capital products and services, whereas private property often refers to capital or the means of production. Stocks and bonds are examples of investment property that are categorized as capital assets. The entire personal property portfolio also counts as a capital asset.
There are three distinct categories of personal property: tangible, intangible, and listed. Anything that can be held and has a clear worth is considered tangible personal property, whereas anything that cannot be touched or held has intangible personal property.
To know more about Personal property refer to: brainly.com/question/14115723
#SPJ4
Answer:
a) it gave too much power to the people.
d) it didn't answer a lot of specific questions as to how to run the country.
Explanation:
The Articles of Confederation failed because they did not give Congress and the national government enough power. The new United States just fought a war to end what they considered tyrannical rule of a strong government that overpowered local government and the leaders of the U.S. feared a powerful central government.
<span>Because
basically, in the first place, both are from different fields. While sociology
is more on arts, other sciences such as Physics, Biology and Chemistry are the
hard sciences. Hard sciences means that the experimentation requires a very
small amount of error, up to one percent. This experimentation uses materials
which really expensive and harmful. Meanwhile on sociology, it requires a room
of error up to five percent since some of its population is bound to different
errors such as human errors, etc.</span>
Answer:
<h3>Freedom of speech.</h3>
Explanation:
- Freedom of speech is a principal that advocates the freedom of a person to state his/her opinion freely and to impart information and ideas without any restrictions.
- However, in the case of Schenk v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution does not protect a person when "falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing panic" because freedom of speech does not protect speech that has the potential to incite danger and disharmony in the society.
- Therefore, in the case of Schenk v. United States, freedom of speech of First Amendment was limited.