Answer:
The have developed the Nordic Model.
Explanation:
The Nordic Model combines a capitalist economy with a welfare state. Ideologically, it can be said that the Nordic Model is essentially Social-Democratic.
In these Northern European countries, the economy is not centralized, and the means of production are not owned by the state, as it happens in socialist/communist countries like Cuba or North Korea, and in the Past, the Soviet Union, and Mao's China. The opposite is true: the economy is mosty free, there are few trade barriers, corporate taxes are not too high, and competition and innovation are promoted.
At the same time, people pay very high taxes, in the form of income, sales and property taxes. These taxes fund a welfare system consisting in free healthcare, free college, unemployment benefits and public housing. Note that things are not actually free because people fund them through taxes, but people pay those taxes according to their income, and if for example, they need medical care, they do not have to pay a lot of money out of pocket (frequently, the do not have to pay anything at all to visit a doctor, or get prescriptions).
The system has been succesful because corruption is low. There is also a great deal of social cohesion, and most people are glad to pay their high taxes because they know those taxes are being used well.
Answer:
Provided places to fish and hunt. Also, because when the lands flooded it then became fertile.
Explanation:
Answer:
I think choice 2 if im right make me brainliest.
Explanation:
Answer:
The situation of the 60s - early 70s of the 18th century gives the impression that Britain deliberately provoked a colonial rebellion. The starting point of post-war tension growth was decree of 1763 on the Allegany-Cumberland line. It was followed in 1765 by a series of laws aimed at further economic strangulation of the colonies, in particular the Stamp Act, which introduced the five times taxation of all printed matter produced in the colonies and any legal documents drawn up on their territory.
The legislative initiatives of the mother country have become increasingly ominous. Thus, failure to comply with the Stamp Act threatened with the death penalty. De facto colonies were plunged into the atmosphere of medieval legal brutality.
In response, the Sons of Liverty extremist groups attacked British military and royal officials in the colonies. In parallel, a massive boycott of British goods began.
Such a decisive response caused confusion in London. In parliament, the voice of a few supporters of softening attitudes toward the colonies was finally heard. The internal struggle that took place in British political circles at that time was reflected by subsequent “zigzags” in their lawmaking. So, in 1766 the Stamp Act was canceled and the Sugar Act was softened, which retained the prohibition only on the import of rum into colonies. But in 1777, the Townshend Acts entered into force, introducing increased duties on imported tea, glass, paper, paints, and lead.
The Boston Massacre provoked a violent reaction. Riots spread to small towns and rural areas. The escalation of the conflict has a ‘sobering’ effect on the British Parliament. A gesture of reconciliation on its part was the abolition of the Townshend Acts, with one strange exception - the preservation of high duties on the import of tea. But such small concessions could no longer defuse the situation.
Explanation:
