Answer:
A) The first is a prediction about a recommendation the main argument opposes; the second is a conclusion drawn in order to support the main conclusion.
Explanation:
From the argument above by the two senators, it could be seen that the two Senators are argueing in favour and argainst the Tax. Senator Baker, was of the believe that his opponent, Senator Rothmore calling for increase in taxes to fund programs helps the long-term unemployed.
His argument was based soley on the unemployed without factoring in the small businesses that would be killed off as a result of the tax increment. The fall of small businesses would definitely affect the prediction he made about unemployed getting work. This is because, those unemployed can only work by the opportunities created by the small businesses.
Senator Baker only made the second conclusion inorder to support his argument on the need to lower taxes which would drive job creations thereby being a win-win situation for both the government and the citizens.
Answer:
D. bullwhip effect.
Explanation:
Its a Phenomena that explains how small fluctuations in demand at retail level can cause larger fluctuations in demand at the whole sale
I believe the answer is: C. unoccupied lands.
<span>The act was aimed to give the government more land for economic purposes (such as place for settlements or acquiring it resources).
This act lead to the mass migration of native Americans to western territories of the united states</span><span />
Answer:
The contract is voidable at Race's discretion.
Explanation:
The law will recognise the contract as being valid. However, the inebriated state in which Race was in when he signed the contract is of concern here. Since his ability to fully understand and comprehend the terms and nature of the contract was compromised, he has the option to disaffirm or reaffirm the contract in question.
