Answer:
Women have always worked outside the home but never before in the numbers or with the same impact as they did in World War II. Prior to the war, most of the women that did work were from the lower working classes and many of these were minorities. There were a variety of attitudes towards women in the work force. Some thought they should only have jobs that men didn’t want while others felt women should give up their jobs so unemployed men could have a job, especially during the Great Depression. Still others held the view that women from the middle class or above should never lower themselves to go to work. These and other viewpoints would be challenged with the United States’ entry into World War II.
Explanation:
After the war, women were still employed as secretaries, waitresses, or in other clerical jobs, what we often call the "pink collar" work force. Those jobs were not as well paid, and they were not as enjoyable or challenging, but women did take those jobs because they either wanted or needed to keep working.
HOPE IT HELPS.
PLEASE MARK ME AS BRAINLIEST.
Answer:
See answer section
Explanation:
Command economy is also known as the planned economy. The planned economy is less productive than the market economy because it is governed by the government to obtain the goal for the society and country. So, it cannot work as a market economy. On the other hand, market economies support better quality at low prices. That is why the market economy is referred to as a free enterprise system.
Millennials, that's what they are called. It's a pretty common term nowadays
In the context of organizational psychology, in this instance, Brian is exhibiting the characteristics of a "<span>transformational leader".
</span>
Transformational leadership is a style of administration where a pioneer works with subordinates to recognize required change, making a dream to direct the change through motivation, and executing the adjustment pair with conferred individuals from a gathering.
Eurasia is the combination of some parts of Europe and asian continent.
Religious view on wealth combination in these two regions were massively different.
Europe that dominated by Christians actually see wealth accumulation as acceptable as long is you don't let your life being controlled by it (eventhough the facts is many religious leaders actually lavished with a lot of wealth compared to commoners)
In asian continent that dominated by Buddhism, Confucianism, or Hinduism, wealth accumulation is seen in a more negative connotation compared to the European view.
