Answer:
ethnocentrism; cultural relativism
Explanation:
Ethnocentrism refers to evaluation of another culture based on preconceived beliefs and standards garnered from ones own culture. It occurs as result of the belief that one's ethnicity is superior to others ethnic groups.
On the other hand cultural relativism suggests that one's culture could only be understood in the context and criteria of that person's culture and not anothers'
Answer:
They are more likely to be hospitalized for preventable conditions.
Explanation:
According to the lastest statistics by the U.S. Census Bureau, in 2018 there were 27.5 million people in the U.S. without health insurance.
When it comes to ethnicities: 5.4% of whites were without insurance, 9.7% of blacks were without insurance, and 17.8% of hispanics were without insurance.
Lack of insurance means that healthcare is more expensive. People without insurance often put off doctor visits. This may cause the development of preventable diseases to the point of requiring hospitalization.
As minorities in the US are, in percentage terms, more often uninsured than White People, it can be easily concluded that minorities are also more likely to be hospitalized for preventable conditions.
Answer:
there was a dark connection that she got into, with included nuclear subjects, where they had to be careful that nobody found out. Albright weighed in on a range of foreign policy dilemmas. She called the recent escalation in violence between Israel and the Palestinians. Hope it helps!
Explanation:
It depends on which axis is supply and which axis is demand , it’s either an increase in demand or increase in supply. it’s increasing either way
The owners of the property claimed the city had violated the Fifth Amendment's takings clause, which forbade the government from seizing private property without just compensation for public use.
<h3>What was the central tenet in Kelo v. City of New London?</h3>
The U.S. Supreme Court concluded in Kelo v. City of New London that New London could acquire privately owned lands for private development as part of its economic revitalization strategy.
The rationality of this project was The property owners contended that the city had violated the Amendment's takings provision, which guarantees that the government will not take private property for public use without just compensation.
Learn more about Kelo v. City of New London:
brainly.com/question/10992257
#SPJ1