I don't believe so.
Government intervention (such as welfares) is actually a good policy to help poor people sustain themselves for a short period of time .
But, in order to fully eliminate their poverty, the government have to eventually Help those people get a good job to sustain their own living, otherwise, the Government just hemorrhaging expenditures and increases national debt overtime.
Answer:
it exists to show others the backstory
Explanation:
What are the options? thanks for using brainly.
The supreme court held the drug testing by school authorities reasonable under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. So option d aptly describes the Vernonia v Acton cases.
<h3>What is the Vernonia v Acton case?</h3>
The Supreme Court of the U.S. in June 1995 gave a verdict that the random drug-testing by the Oregon school authority of student-athletes is valid under the U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment.
The ruling under the Vernonia v Acton cases showed Students enjoy fewer Fourth Amendment protections than free adults i.e students are under strict government control than adults.
Therefore option d aptly describes the Vernonia v Acton cases ruling
Learn more about Vernonia v Acton cases here:
brainly.com/question/19604059
<span>A statrap was a governor of a province. His task was that of
an administrator and had a royal court. He had several responsibilities such as
collect taxes, controlled local officials and subjects, judge criminal cases,
created roads and protected the territories from bandits and other
threats. A satrap was assisted by a
council of Persians and was under the rule of a royal secretary and envoys of
the king who were the king’s eye and who conducted annual inspections and
carried out permanent control.</span>
