Answer:
a. Continental crust is less dense than oceanic crust.
d.Oceanic crust is different from continental crust because most continental crust was formed from cooling magma.
Explanation:
The part of earth's crust that lies beneath the ocean floor is called the oceanic crust.
Continental crust is the portion of earth crust which forms the landmass.
The different layers in Continental crust is composed of by cooling of magma to form igneous rocks. It is different from the oceanic crust. Also oceanic crust is more denser than continental crust.
Answer: The judicial branch had supported their position.
Explanation: As a last resort they planned to bring suit before the Supreme Court because they felt that why should they be expelled from their lands when they no longer threatened white settlements and could compete with them on many levels? They intended to fight their ouster, and they figured they had many ways to do it.
The Supreme Court ruled that The Native Americans were “domestic dependent nations,” subject to the United States as a ward to a guardian. The territory was part of the United States but not subject to action by individual states. However, the missionaries encouraged them to stand fast. When the Native Americans read Marshall’s decision, they had honestly believed that the Nation had won the case, that Georgia lacked authority to control their lives and property, and that the courts would protect them.
People would find ways to hide income from their governments, to avoid paying tax on it; people would stop saving enough of their own money for retirement or other reasons, to avoid paying taxes on that money (which was likely taxed when it was first earned, or if not, may be taxed again when spent, depending on the type of account it is saved in). Most people would buy less, not spend more if they have fewer dollars in their pockets after their income is taxed more. So would governments. Infrastructure would suffer. People might buy more things which are harmful to their health, or to the health of the economy or ecology and might cost the government more in health care spending or to correct those problems.
The ideal would be to increase income for the government, while not hurting individuals too much. For example, I live in a state in the US which has a state sales tax, and in the US we are taxed on interest income and also wages, income and earnings, plus income earned outside the US, too. We pay annual or monthly property tax rates based on the zip (post) code we live in and the assessed value of our property.
If we got rid of the consumption tax, we would likely experience increases in all other taxes. For example: A huge part of our tax structure is gasoline taxes. Our public transport systems in most places is poor; that gas tax is paid by hundreds of millions of people on the road nationwide. If you get rid of it, and that tax amount is about 40% of the cost of a gallon of gas here, people will buy more gas. Sure.
But they will also pollute more, rip up roads more, cause more traffic accidents and create massive roadblocks. And, the schools they send their kids to will suffer. The incentive to find alternative fuels or more eco friendly options will disappear as we guzzle it all until it's gone. The property tax we pay where we live pays only so much to local schools; it will go up too.
Gas taxes are distributed to so many places, their loss will reverberate for a long time. You'd have to make the income taxes so high most people would do anything not to work, not to work on the books officially, or will work so hard to hide the income, the government will waste time, effort and money hunting it down. Penalties for non payment would increase. Jails would be filled, clogging the court system.
People might agitate for better public transport, but might not get it and not in time to alleviate the problems. They might agitate to get better schools but there wont be the money to improve them. They might agitate violently for tax repeal. They might move to another state for better schools, or to another country to work, destabilizing their neighborhoods and cities, or maybe invest in other countries, not here. Living and working elsewhere, US citizens still have to pay tax on what they make outside the US, but they are usually paid more or given tax free benefits to offset that when moving away. Immigrants which staff our hospitals and teach in our schools, or who come here to study in college or start businesses here, might stop doing that. More Americans will emigrate out of the country or become expats, trying to find better options.
Unintended consequences will occur. They always do. Tax avoidance in real life always creates a situation where on paper a trade off would work, but because of human nature and the desire to pay as few taxes as possible; it usually doesn't. Consumption taxes allied with income taxes and closing loopholes so people limit the taxes they pay but don't eliminate them or pay nothing, are probably best for striking a balance, and are the most efficient & fairest way to collect needed taxes to run governments, and provide the most for the most people.
The system of checks and balances is an important part of the Constitution. With checks and balances, each of the three branches of government can limit the powers of the others. This way, no one branch becomes too powerful. Each branch “checks” the power of the other branches to make sure that the power is balanced between them. How does this system of checks and balances work?
The process of how laws are made (see the following page) is a good example of checks and balances in action. First, the legislative branch introduces and votes on a bill. The bill then goes to the executive branch, where the President decides whether he thinks the bill is good for the country. If so, he signs the bill, and it becomes a law.
If the President does not believe the bill is good for the country, he does not sign it. This is called a veto. But the legislative branch gets another chance. With enough votes, the legislative branch can override the executive branch's veto, and the bill becomes a law.
Once a law is in place, the people of the country can test it through the court system, which is under the control of the judicial branch. If someone believes a law is unfair, a lawsuit can be filed. Lawyers then make arguments for and against the case, and a judge decides which side has presented the most convincing arguments. The side that loses can choose to appeal to a higher court, and may eventually reach the highest court of all, the Supreme Court.
If the legislative branch does not agree with the way in which the judicial branch has interpreted the law, they can introduce a new piece of legislation, and the process starts all over again.