Answer:
Historically, the Frank case has had reverberations throughout the past century. The only high-profile lynching of an American Jew, Frank's death could be felt in both the North and the South, and in both Jewish and non-Jewish communities.
Notably, two significant groups latched on to the Frank case to expand their reach nationally.
"A short time after the lynching of Leo Frank, 33 members of the group that called itself the Knights of Mary Phagan gathered on a mountaintop near Atlanta and formed the new Ku Klux Klan of Georgia," University of Missouri at Kansas City School of Law professor Douglas O. Linder wrote in a 2008 overview of the Frank case. "Meanwhile, members of an outraged Jewish community met to create the Anti-Defamation League to combat anti-Semitism.
Explanation:
Answer: Shaping
Explanation:
Shaping in terms of operant conditioning is defined as mechanism in which closely related reinforcements are rewarded that aim towards the targeted behavior .Exactly desired behavior in not expected in this series rather successive behavior is appreciated.
According to the question,Adia is using behavioral shaping in her class towards student.She is rewarding points to children for indulging in class participation as children are showing closely related feature through small amount of indulgence which is behavior leading to desired behavior.
India is suddenly in the news for all the wrong reasons. It is now hitting the headlines as one of the most unequal countries in the world, whether one measures inequality on the basis of income or wealth.
So how unequal is India? As the economist Branko Milanovic says: “The question is simple, the answer is not.” Based on the new India Human Development Survey (IHDS), which provides data on income inequality for the first time, India scores a level of income equality lower than Russia, the United States, China and Brazil, and more egalitarian than only South Africa.
According to a report by the Johannesburg-based company New World Wealth, India is the second-most unequal country globally, with millionaires controlling 54% of its wealth. With a total individual wealth of $5,600 billion, it’s among the 10 richest countries in the world – and yet the average Indian is relatively poor.
Compare this with Japan, the most equal country in the world, where according to the report millionaires control only 22% of total wealth.
In India, the richest 1% own 53% of the country’s wealth, according to the latest data from Credit Suisse. The richest 5% own 68.6%, while the top 10% have 76.3%. At the other end of the pyramid, the poorer half jostles for a mere 4.1% of national wealth.
What’s more, things are getting better for the rich. The Credit Suisse data shows that India’s richest 1% owned just 36.8% of the country’s wealth in 2000, while the share of the top 10% was 65.9%. Since then they have steadily increased their share of the pie. The share of the top 1% now exceeds 50%.
This is far ahead of the United States, where the richest 1% own 37.3% of total wealth. But India’s finest still have a long way to go before they match Russia, where the top 1% own a stupendous 70.3% of the country’s wealth.
Determines investments/ incomes. it lacks competition and efficiency but includes low levels of inequality and unemployment
Answer:
Banks can borrow from the federal reserve system at discount rate.
Explanation:
The fed provides the fund for banks to increase their reserves through open market operations. The fed purchases government securities or bonds to increase reserves with banks.
If a bank is not able to borrow funds for its reserves from the Fed funds market, then, in that case, it can borrow from the federal reserve system at a discount window.
The rate at which it has pay back this loan is called the discount rate. This rate is used as a tool by the feds to control the money supply. The discount rate serves as a tool for monetary policy.
