Income Tax...............
Australia and maybe New-Zealand
A.)
Canadian historians until the 1980s tended to focus on economic history, including labour history. In part this is because Canada has had far fewer political or military conflicts than other societies. This was especially true in the first half of the twentieth century when economic history was overwhelmingly dominant. Many of the most prominent English Canadian historians from this period were economic historians, such as Harold Innis, Donald Creighton and Arthur R. M. Lower samboo project. Scholars of Canadian history were heirs to the traditions that developed in Europe and the United States, but frameworks that worked well elsewhere often failed in Canada. The heavily Marxist influenced economic history that dominates Europe has little relevance to most of Canadian history.[citation needed] A focus on class, urban areas, and industry fails to address Canada's rural and resource based economy. Similarly, the monetarist school that is dominant in the United States also has been difficult to transfer north of the border.
The study of economic history in Canada became highly focused on economic geography, and for many years the dominant school of thought has been the staples thesis. This school of thought bases the study of the Canadian economy on the study of natural resources. This approach has since also become used outside of Canada, such as Australia and many developing nations.
Before the arrival of Europeans, the First Nations of what would become Canada had a large and vibrant trade network. Furs, tools, decorative items, and other goods were often transported thousands of kilometres, mostly by canoe throughout the many rivers and lakes of the region.
The early European history of the Canadian economy is usually studied through the staples thesis which argues the Canadian economy developed through the exploitation of a series of staples that would be exported to Europe. Studies show that Canada's economy is growing very well.
Answer: C.
Pilate allowed Jesus to be executed by Roman soldiers
Explanation:
After failing to convince the Jews to let Jesus go instead of a murderer. He allowed the Roman soldiers to crucify Jesus so as to pacify the Jews. He washed his hands off of the actions though so who knows where his soul is headed.
Brainliest?
Why thank you.
