- Lead to greater state power, absolute monarchies, had to finance wars
- Nationalism came with the french revolution
- Some States had their own armies, republics replaced monarchies.
- Growth of territorial integrity by raising the cost of conquering territory inhabited by those of other nations
- It Lead to the German and Italian reunification
- Issues of national self-determination in Austro-Hungarian empire
- Eventually contributed to conflicts that embued both World Wars
- Social evolution
Nepal is a multi-geographic country. It is located in the southern Asia, between the two large countries, China and India. ... Nepal is divided into three main physiographic regions-Hilly region, mountainous region and Terai regions.
If one individual behaves in a socially inappropriate manner, he or she is considered deviant, but if several individuals behave this way, it is referred to as a collective action. The problem that is made would be called a collective action problem wherein a group of people tries to behave in a discouraging manner in order to achieve a common goal. But the term collective action id not only limited to inappropriate behaviors. It would be a group activity where they aim to achieve the same goals. Examples are joining social protests, participating in national defense, advocating for the preservation of the environment and strikes.<span />
<span>John has a mind set regarding fruit. Apples are sweet, apples can be a dessert, you can apple pie, apple struedel, apples sauce. Tomatoes are not given as a dessert, tomatoes can be very delicious but are never sweet.</span>
None of these conclusions is valid.
- The first one implies that people either think that their employer should cover part of the health insurance costs (as said in the original sentence), or they think that the employer should pay 100%. This is not correct because there are other possible opinions people can have, like thinking that the employer shouldn't pay for anything, for example.
- The second conclusion is invalid for the same reason: it implies that people can only either think that the employer should pay a large part, or that the employer shouldn't pay anything. It is not considering other options.
- The third conclusion does not work either because it is referring to what people think about <em>the amount </em>of the costs themselves, whereas the original topic was <em>how</em> they are paid for.
