Answer:
Since they both need to discover the beast and they are both terrified.
Explanation:
Jack is chasing for sustenance in the wilderness. They've been in the island for half a month. He is being contrasted with a predator.The Jungle resembles extremely dim, calm and appears to be dreadful. It's semi-dimness in light of the fact that there are bunches of trees and plants and creepers that Jack can't see the way. The residue is moist and there is completely so hints of any animals next to Jack. The most severe piece of the wilderness is it's excessively dull that it doesn't look like of some other wildernesses on the planet and this makes an irregular, perilous inclination. Since Jack is beginning to end up agreeable in the wilderness, this demonstrates somewhat wild in him. Ralph and Simon are endeavoring to construct the asylums for every one of them to live, yet they aren't effective in light of the fact that they don't generally know the system to manufacture a safe house and have no devices,
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.
The meaning of the given statement is that C. The games were too closely related to an official school activity, showing religious support.
<h3>What is Religious Support?</h3>
This refers to the endorsement by a person or a group of persons to a religious cause.
Hence, we can see that based on the knowledge of the Santa Fe District v. Doe, there was a determination that the football game had some religious support.
Read more about Santa Fe District v. Doe here:
brainly.com/question/6589941
#SPJ1
The answer to this question is <span>Fast Track Experiment
</span><span>Fast Track Experiment refers to giving a certain group of people a set of special treatment that is catered based on their special circumtances.
</span>For example, for juvenile who acting out because they wanted to feel though, there is a program that could make those juveniles to spend 3 days in prison, so they could directly see the reality behing their actions.
Answer: stimulus generalization.
Explanation:
Stimulus generalization can happen in classical conditioning as well as in operant conditioning. When it´s in operant conditioning, stimulus generalization describes the way people learn something in a specific situation and then can apply it to different but similar circumstances.
In this example, Jessi first learned at preschool that to get a snack she has to wash her hands. Instead of having to relearn this practice at home, she applied the same rule she had already learned.
