Answer: Say the Federal Reserve decides to reduce interest rates to stimulate economic growth. They do this by purchasing government securities over the open market with newly created money. The bank will take this new money and lend it out (or purchase securities, it doesn't matter due to arbitrage). This has the effect of increasing the supply of loanable funds, pushing down the interest rate.
Now just because the interest rate is lowered does not mean that the expansionary monetary policy will have its desired effect immediately. Lower interest rates encourage borrowing, and increased borrowing can increase employment, GDP, etc. There is a lag between the reduction in interest rates and its effects on the real economy. People will not respond to the lower interest rates by borrowing and hiring immediately; the effect can take 1-2 years.
Explanation:
The U.S. Supreme Court hands down its decision on Sanford v. Dred Scott, a case that intensified national divisions over the issue of slavery.
In 1834, Dred Scott, a slave, had been taken to Illinois, a free state, and then Wisconsin territory, where the Missouri Compromise of 1820 prohibited slavery. Scott lived in Wisconsin with his master, Dr. John Emerson, for several years before returning to Missouri, a slave state. In 1846, after Emerson died, Scott sued his master’s widow for his freedom on the grounds that he had lived as a resident of a free state and territory. He won his suit in a lower court, but the Missouri supreme court reversed the decision. Scott appealed the decision, and as his new master, J.F.A. Sanford, was a resident of New York, a federal court decided to hear the case on the basis of the diversity of state citizenship represented. After a federal district court decided against Scott, the case came on appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, which was divided along slavery and antislavery lines; although the Southern justices had a majority.
During the trial, the antislavery justices used the case to defend the constitutionality of the Missouri Compromise, which had been repealed by the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. The Southern majority responded by ruling on March 6, 1857, that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional and that Congress had no power to prohibit slavery in the territories. Three of the Southern justices also held that African Americans who were slaves or whose ancestors were slaves were not entitled to the rights of a federal citizen and therefore had no standing in court. These rulings all confirmed that, in the view of the nation’s highest court, under no condition did Dred Scott have the legal right to request his freedom. The Supreme Court’s verdict further inflamed the irrepressible differences in America over the issue of slavery, which in 1861 erupted with the outbreak of the American Civil War.
Answer:
b) value fairness, supportiveness and respecting individual rights.
Explanation:
People-oriented culture is a business approach that believes in investing in the employees and recognizing their role in the organization. It caters to the needs and support employees for the upliftment of a company. It develops a culture where people look at the work as fun and therefore actively peruse their work. It is n contrast to the traditional task-driven approach of business model. This culture considers employees to the greatest asset to the company.
Answer:
True.
Explanation:
The given statement would be considered true as it asserts a true claim about J.S. Mill's 'principle of liberty' denying the conception of 'victimless crime'. He stated that individual actions should only be restricted when it is causing damage to others. He proclaimed that "the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others". In simple terms, he stated that no one should be prevented from doing a specific action unless his/her actions are not invasive or harmful to the other's rights. Therefore, the given assertion is <u>true.</u>
