The answer is:
The following options benefit African consumers but not African farmers.
I. Subsidies to keep crop prices low
IV. Availability of imported grains
<em>Explanation:</em>
<em>If you were to subsidize to keep prices low, consumers would benefit exclusively because the would pay a fixed rate for their farm products. On the other hand farmers would be affected because we don't know many factors that would influence this decission. Some of these factors may be.</em>
<em>- Will there be a price fixed for certain products</em>
<em>- Will the grains be cash crops</em>
<em>- Will farmers be allowed to rotate crops</em>
<em>Without knowing these factors one can only assume that when you susidize a crop the conditions imposed on the farmers may or may not be ideal.</em>
<em>When it comes to the availability of imported grains, some of these grains may be even cheaper than local grains. This may have a negative effect on local farmers who cannot lower their prices at a loss. Consumers would definitely benefit by paying lower prices from imported crops.</em>
There's many answers for this question, as long as it's a similar word to disbelief. President Roosevelt's reaction was pretty much thinking, "This is unbelievable." So therefore, you can put disbelief or distrust.
In addition to plants, Europeans brought domesticated animals such as cattle, sheep, goats, pigs, and horses. Eventually, people began to breed horses, cattle, and sheep in North America, Mexico , and South America . ... In North America , the horse dramatically changed how many Native Americans lived.
Answer:
i believe the answer is the wealth of nations.
Answer:
Eisenhower held office during the Cold War, a period of sustained geopolitical tension between the United States and the Soviet Union. The Eisenhower administration continued the Truman administration's policy of containment, which called for the United States to prevent the spread of Communism to new states.
Explanation:
