Answer:
Phillip rebelled against Rome's authority by burning a papal bull as a gesture of defiance. he threatened to curse his sons if any valued God over France. Phillip 's conflict to manage his spawning domain, together with the scope of the dept and interest expenses were paced in context by the rivers of treasure that flowed to the treasury from the New World. Phillip slowly retreated from his father's legacy as a results of crushing debt that Charles V bequeathed. Phillip was forced to suspend and renounce the crown's debt, bankrupting the mighty House of Fugger along with lesser bankers.
Explanation:
Phillip was the son of the Holy Roman emperor Charles V and Isabella of Portugal. the emperor wrote secret memoranda to his son Phillip, from time to time, impressing on him the high duties to which God has called him and warning him against trusting any of his advisers too much. As a results Phillip was very rebellious and ...
Answer:
Free trade agreements significantly decrease transaction costs leading to a
decrease in the cost of international goods and services.
Explanation:
Given that the primary purpose of the Free Trade Agreement is to lessen the impediments that often make the business transaction between two or more countries difficult or expensive, thereby leading to lower cost of international commodities and improved economic integration among the countries involved. For example removal of trade tariffs and trade quotas.
Hence, Free trade agreements increase globalized trade because "Free trade agreements significantly decrease transaction costs leading to a decrease in the cost of international goods and services."
Answer:
A rite of passage
Explanation:
The concept of a rite of passage was developed by the French ethnographer Arnold van Gennep. A rite of passage describes a ceremony or ritual that people undergo in order to leave a particular social group and enter another one. The most commonly known rite of passage is that of transitioning from childhood into adulthood. This is most likely what Smita is experiencing in this event.
I'm not sure of the exact word you are looking for, but the general idea is that the federal law will always reign supreme if there is ever a conflict between the federal and state laws. Federal law is superior or higher-ranking or more preferable, etc.
Here is the exact phrasing from Article VI of the US Constitution: "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."
