I personally think that both would be a good idea. It also depends on how bad the budget deficit is. if the government would raise taxes by like 1% it wouldn't be to bad. they could also not give as many funds to things that arn't important like maybe a science investigation that isn't very useful. but if they would decrease spendings on, for exaple medicare that would effect people in a not so good way. but if they raised taxes too much it could also effect people badly. hope this helped
I Believe is Movement or Location. I hope it helps
Answer:
Natural resources are important to study, because they're drivers of modern economics. The natural resources of Australia include most famously coal, iron ore, and gold. Metals like iron ore and gold total 28% of Australian exports, but coal isn't far behind at 18%.
Explanation:
HAPPY TO HELP
--ALASKA
Answer:No it wouldn't require any food labeling because these are an exception when it comes to food labeling as stated by the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act of 1990(NLEA)
Explanation:Nutrition labeling applies to grocery shops and restaurants where people do their most eating and food shopping daily , this is done so that a person can make a health choice and food companies can be challenged to improve nutrition in their brands of food.
Nutrition Labeling--Exemptions
Under NLEA, some foods are exempt from nutrition labeling such as food which is only bought for immediate consumption such as food sold in hospital cafeterias , airplanes , and food service vendors such as small cookies.
Ready to eat told even if it is not for immediate consumption but it is cooked just right there such as baked goods ,deli and candy
Also food given to consumers for nutritional purposes.
Answer:
<em>CERCLA set up a trust fund to fund both cleanup and enforcement actions. Sometimes, the fund is called the Superfund.</em>
Explanation:
<em>On December 11, 1980, Congress passed the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), commonly known as Superfund.</em>
The law passed a tax on both the chemicals and petroleum industries which established wide Federal power to respond directly to leaks or potential releases of hazardous materials that could threaten public health or the atmosphere.
$1.6 billion was collected over five years, and also the tax went to a trust fund to clean up hazardous waste sites that had been neglected or unregulated.
