Answer:
Sharecropping is hard work with no almost no good outcomes. The families who typically fall under it's trap work and live in horrible, filthy conditions. And they do this for only a small portion of crops, no payment. For these reasons, sharecropping was viewed as a trap that was easily comparable to enslavement.
Explanation:
"Sharecropping is a type of farming in which families rent small plots of land from a landowner in return for a portion of their crop, to be given to the landowner at the end of each year." - Sharecropping - Definition, System & Facts - HISTORY
Hope this helps!!
The correct answer is <span>C. They claimed that since the colonies had no representation in Parliament, Parliament had no right to tax them.
They thought that the government should have no right to levy taxes if they don't have a representative in the British parliament. This was a rather widespread opinion which soon led to the beginning of the revolution.</span>
The war provided Great Britain enormous territorial gains in North America but disputes over subsequent frontier policy and paying the wars expenses led to colonial discontent and ultimately to the American revolution
Invasions by Barbarian tribes
Economic troubles and overreliance on slave labor
Answer:
The constitutionality of the Act was challenged by states based on two main grounds: 1. The issue of individual mandate; and 2. Mandatory expansion of medicaid by states.
Explanation:
The Affordable Healthcare Act otherwise known as Obamacare was a health reform Act that came into force in 2010 under the Obama administration in the United States of America which made provision for affordable health insurance for every citizen of America, and also expanded the scope of eligibility for medicaid in the United States of America. The constitutionality/legality of the Act was challenged by a total of about 26 states of the United States of America particularly on the ground that the Act imposed sanctions on states which failed to expand the medicaid, and on the ground of individual mandate to purchase health insurance violated the original Clause.
However, concerning the issue of individual mandate to buy health insurance, the Supreme Court of America upheld the constitutionality of the ACA on the ground that the congress has the valid and constitutional power to impose tax.
On the other hand, on the issue of mandatory expansion of medicaid by states, the court stated that it was optional and not mandatory for states to chose to expand the medicaid, thereby declaring the mandatory medicaid expansion by states unconstitutional.
