Answer:
Examples include making treaties, commanding the military, appointing Supreme Court justices, and vetoing legislation.
Explanation:
Answer:
The personal tale of both are mention below:
Explanation:
The individual stories that Carlos Munoz and Paula Crisostomo shared were that cops made tranquil dissent into ruthless circumstances and that she didn't have the foggiest idea what school was and she didn't generally have a controlling hand to apply to one, respectively.
Both of them fundamentally expressed how tough it was being Latin in school and attempting to create the best for their lives.
The Spanish Nationalists acquire support from Hitler and Mussolini because They considered Francisco Franco a fellow fascist.
Option (c) is correct.
<h3 /><h3>Why Francisco Franco is a fascist?</h3>
Various thoughts drove Nazi support for General Franco, considering a feeling to turn attention departed from the core European plan of Hitler and the placement of a pro-German Spanish state to endanger France.
Francisco Franco was competent to move the workforce from Spanish Morocco to the earth to resume his battle on the Capital of Spain by passing judgment with their military help.
End-to-end of the three-year conflict, Hitler and Mussolini supplied important military support to the Spanish Nationalist Army. They also intended to support the spread of fascism.
Therefore, option C is correct.
Learn more about Francisco Franco, refer to:
brainly.com/question/1602760
Answer:
The benefits of trade agreements are not felt evenly by all industries in an economy. In fact, even member nations gain varying advantages by entering into trade agreements. However, despite these drawbacks, the United States continues to act on its commitment to free trade. In 2005, the United States signed a fair trade agreement (FTA) with Australia, and in 2012, it signed a trade protection agreement (TPA) with Colombia. Both agreements have been in force for a while. Now the question is, Have these agreements benefited the US economy? Let’s examine the impact of the bilateral agreements with Colombia and Australia on the US economy.
According to the USTR, the International Trade Commission (ITC) predicted that the United States–Colombia TPA would increase national GDP by $2.5 billion (Office of the US Trade Representative). Under the TPA, US exports to Colombia increased from $12.0 billion in 2010 to $18.3 billion in 2013 (US Department of State). The TPA seems to have delivered on its promise, because according to the USTR, US exports to Colombia increased by 30% in 2013 (Office of the US Trade Representative). So financially, Colombia is a lucrative market for the United States. However, the main opposition to the TPA stemmed from concerns about the terrible labor conditions in Colombia and the violent threats to those seeking to improve labor conditions in a country rife with crime. Although violence is a major concern, the FTA will eventually help both nations by bringing about social and labor reforms through economic activity. By helping Colombia become a peaceful country, the United States can pave the way for increased trade with Colombia in the future.
The United States–Australia FTA received considered opposition in both countries. US dairy farmers, ranchers, and small farmers were anxious about job losses resulting from the free entry of Australian products into the US market. However, if we judge by the boost in exports, the FTA has contributed to overall US economic growth. According to the USTR, in the first five years of the FTA, US exports to Australia increased by 33% (Office of the US Trade Representative). The FTA removed all tariffs on American imports into Australia, giving US exporters barrier-free entry into Australian markets.
The export industry plays a key role in driving economic growth and generating jobs in the United States. Colombia and Australia are two large and important markets for US exporters. The United States faces competition from other nations for access to these markets. By signing trade agreements, American goods can compete effectively in these markets. Although the agreements with Colombia and Australia are opposed for valid reasons, the agreements will benefit the US economy over time
Explanation:
