The author shows a how a protective tariff will benefit people in his town by describing the various ways in which the protective tariff could help benefit people, making examples about how different people in town would have some benefits, like the mercantile and its commercial pursuit, or the parents and their earnings that went to the comforts of their aged parents.
<span>---
</span>The author illustrates how the town would be negatively affected if the factory was to close by portraying an imaginary future image where the factory is closed and everyone mentioned before joining in conversations, comparing the past to the present.
<span>---
The proper method for setting questions of economic and national policy is to see for themselves,</span> imagining to themselves the difference between a factory at work and a factory burnt, because when people can see the practical difference between a factory stopped and a factory active, the issue will be easily resolved.<span>
---
</span>A modern autoworker employed by an American manufacturer might favor a protective tariff today because of the aggressive competition from other brands that make life difficult for the American manufacturer, and so the hope is that a protective tariff will help them avoid such impasse.
<span>---
American consumers might oppose a such tariff because of its price, as the price for imported goods will grow, and also because the sociocultural context is different, and globalization should have come to an end to protective tariff mechanism since the manufacturer that works only with American people only on the U.S. soil are very limited.</span>
A people have governments to protect their rights
Answer:
The answer is C
Explanation:
I just got this question right on a test
I do not know the answer, but if I were to guess, that it would be the one about plantations.
Plantations were hotspots of manual labor, specifically slaves. And when slaves were outlawed the plantation owners lose there main source of “profit” (aka the need to not pay workers for manual labor and instead use that money to get more laborers) it seems like the logical answer to me.
Also using process of elimination we know that the war could have spilt the country in two. So the union was indeed saved.
It means the income is unfair, some people earn more than others and etc
