1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
DaniilM [7]
3 years ago
7

(15points) if property values increase, how are communities and individuals affected? Select all that apply.

Social Studies
2 answers:
lukranit [14]3 years ago
4 0

2. and 4. would be the correct answers. In my opinion, where I live when the property values increase, the community pays more taxes.

Strike441 [17]3 years ago
3 0

The correct answer is 2) community property tax revenues increase and 4) individual property taxes increase.

If property values increase, communities and individuals are affected in the following ways: community property tax revenues increase and individual property taxes increase.

When property values increase, people have to be conscious that it comes with some changes in the way they pay taxes too. As the value of the property increases, the government charges higher taxes. So people have to know that owning a property implies the constant paying of taxes that are going to increase if the value rises. The more expensive the property, the higher the taxes.

You might be interested in
What does the Preamble promise to do for the people of this country? How has it succeeded, and how has it failed?
Advocard [28]

Answer:

The Preamble of the U.S. Constitution—the document’s famous first fifty-two words— introduces everything that is to follow in the Constitution’s seven articles and twenty-seven amendments. It proclaims who is adopting this Constitution: “We the People of the United States.” It describes why it is being adopted—the purposes behind the enactment of America’s charter of government. And it describes what is being adopted: “this Constitution”—a single authoritative written text to serve as fundamental law of the land. Written constitutionalism was a distinctively American innovation, and one that the framing generation considered the new nation’s greatest contribution to the science of government.

The word “preamble,” while accurate, does not quite capture the full importance of this provision. “Preamble” might be taken—we think wrongly—to imply that these words are merely an opening rhetorical flourish or frill without meaningful effect. To be sure, “preamble” usefully conveys the idea that this provision does not itself confer or delineate powers of government or rights of citizens. Those are set forth in the substantive articles and amendments that follow in the main body of the Constitution’s text. It was well understood at the time of enactment that preambles in legal documents were not themselves substantive provisions and thus should not be read to contradict, expand, or contract the document’s substantive terms.  

But that does not mean the Constitution’s Preamble lacks its own legal force. Quite the contrary, it is the provision of the document that declares the enactment of the provisions that follow. Indeed, the Preamble has sometimes been termed the “Enacting Clause” of the Constitution, in that it declares the fact of adoption of the Constitution (once sufficient states had ratified it): “We the People of the United States . . . do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Importantly, the Preamble declares who is enacting this Constitution—the people of “the United States.” The document is the collective enactment of all U.S. citizens. The Constitution is “owned” (so to speak) by the people, not by the government or any branch thereof. We the People are the stewards of the U.S. Constitution and remain ultimately responsible for its continued existence and its faithful interpretation.

It is sometimes observed that the language “We the People of the United States” was inserted at the Constitutional Convention by the “Committee of Style,” which chose those words—rather than “We the People of the States of . . .”, followed by a listing of the thirteen states, for a simple practical reason: it was unclear how many states would actually ratify the proposed new constitution. (Article VII declared that the Constitution would come into effect once nine of thirteen states had ratified it; and as it happened two states, North Carolina and Rhode Island, did not ratify until after George Washington had been inaugurated as the first President under the Constitution.) The Committee of Style thus could not safely choose to list all of the states in the Preamble. So they settled on the language of both “We the People of the United States.”

Nonetheless, the language was consciously chosen. Regardless of its origins in practical considerations or as a matter of “style,” the language actually chosen has important substantive consequences. “We the People of the United States” strongly supports the idea that the Constitution is one for a unified nation, rather than a treaty of separate sovereign states. (This, of course, had been the arrangement under the Articles of Confederation, the document the Constitution was designed to replace.) The idea of nationhood is then confirmed by the first reason recited in the Preamble for adopting the new Constitution—“to form a more perfect Union.” On the eve of the Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln invoked these words in support of the permanence of the Union under the Constitution and the unlawfulness of states attempting to secede from that union.

The other purposes for adopting the Constitution, recited by the Preamble— to “establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”—embody the aspirations that We the People have for our Constitution, and that were expected to flow from the substantive provisions that follow. The stated goal is to create a government that will meet the needs of the people.

Explanation:

Your welcome

6 0
2 years ago
Explain why most native Americans supported the British during the american revolution
Leviafan [203]

Many Native Americans (mostly Southeastern Indians/ ex. Creeks, Chickasaws, and Choctaws) supported the British in the American Revolution, while some supported the American and Spainsh (the Catawbas) because The British Empire promised to protect their land from the White American settlers if they won and fought with them, much like how Britian also promised slaves freedom if they fought for them or became spies. This was because if they won they would controll the land and the Ameircan colonies and what happens to it.

7 0
4 years ago
Aggressively scanning the road and slower speeds gives you a better chance to avoid collision with a child
likoan [24]
Im assuming this is true or false? so True.
7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
An example of a non-normative factor that may contribute to the formation and development of an individual is the death of a sib
riadik2000 [5.3K]

Answer:  The correct answer is :  True

Explanation:  Non-normative factors refer to biological and environmental determinants that are significant in their effect on vital histories, individual but not general. For example : . a person's health event, a job change, the death of a close relative or a divorce.

3 0
3 years ago
Suggests that people want to see themselves as holding a majority opinion and will therefore remain silent if they perceive that
stich3 [128]

Answer:

Silence/ Spiral of science theory

Explanation:

In sociology, the Spiral of science theory refers to the fact that <u>when a minority has an opinion that is different from the one that the rest of the group have (The majority of the group), they are likely to not state the theory out loud</u> because they are afraid that they might be isolated by saying their opinion out loud, therefore, they choose to remain silent. And this tends to make the minority opinion to appear to be less prevalent than it actually is.

Therefore, the theory that suggests that people want to see themselves as holding a majority opinion and will therefore remain silent if they perceive that they hold a minority opinion. This tends to make the minority opinion appear to be less prevalent than it is is the Spiral of science theory.

8 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Which is not a reason for migration in India today
    10·1 answer
  • people tend to attribute their own personal failures or the failures of people they know well and like to situational factors, s
    12·1 answer
  • _____ attempts to create an association between a response (e.g., buying a brand) and some outcome (e.g., satisfaction) that ser
    5·1 answer
  • A family composed of one or two parents and their children is called
    12·1 answer
  • Construieste cate doua enunturi in care verbele a fi, a avea si a vrea sa fie predicative si auxiliare.
    7·1 answer
  • A music teacher creates an assessment in which students design a how-to document on playing their instruments and then demonstra
    8·2 answers
  • Malik and his family came to the US a few years ago. They've managed to carve out a nice, middle-class lifestyle that they could
    12·1 answer
  • An 80 year old woman reports to her urologist that she is having difficulty controlling her bladder, despite the fact that she s
    13·1 answer
  • Do you agree or disagree with quote "A leader is best when people barely know he exists; when his work is done, his aim fulfille
    7·2 answers
  • True or False: The Charter was adopted in San Francisco.
    7·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!