1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
alexgriva [62]
2 years ago
7

During the late 1800s many new immigrants arrived in the United States. What did America represent to immigrants

History
1 answer:
Readme [11.4K]2 years ago
7 0

Answer:

Almost half of the new immigrants who came to the United States in the late 1800s eventually returned to their home countries. were drawn to the abundant land available.

Explanation:

You might be interested in
The dust bowl of the 1930's, in central u.s. was brought about by
Anni [7]
The dust bowl was a sever drought caused by fluctuations in ocean temperatures. Other factors that contributed to the affect it had on the Midwest  was the dry climate and their use of poor farming techniques.
3 0
2 years ago
What year did standing for the USA National Anthem begin?
NeTakaya
There are historical data that tell us that the habit of standing during the national anthem happened during a ceremony at West Point in the year 1891. However, in 2009 there are data that at an NFL sports ceremony , it was established that the players had to remain standing as the American anthem sang. In 1918, as an extra data, it began to popularize playing the anthem in baseball games, to encourage people to attend the game even in times of World War I, and later also played in American football.
7 0
3 years ago
After the Boston Massacre, the colonies organized
puteri [66]
After the Boston Massacre, the colonies organized the Committees of Correspondence to respond to growing disputes. This was enacted on November 4th, <span>1772.</span>
8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
1. How does the author characterize the
nexus9112 [7]

Answer:s the United States enters the 21st century, it stands unchallenged as the world’s economic leader, a remarkable turnaround from the 1980s when many Americans had doubts about U.S. “competitiveness.” Productivity growth—the engine of improvement in average living standards—has rebounded from a 25-year slump of a little more than 1 percent a year to roughly 2.5 percent since 1995, a gain few had predicted.

Economic engagement with the rest of the world has played a key part in the U.S. economic revival. Our relatively open borders, which permit most foreign goods to come in with a zero or low tariff, have helped keep inflation in check, allowing the Federal Reserve to let the good times roll without hiking up interest rates as quickly as it might otherwise have done. Indeed, the influx of funds from abroad during the Asian financial crisis kept interest rates low and thereby encouraged a continued boom in investment and consumption, which more than offset any decline in American exports to Asia. Even so, during the 1990s, exports accounted for almost a quarter of the growth of output (though just 12 percent of U.S. gross domestic product at the end of the decade).

Yet as the new century dawns, America’s increasing economic interdependence with the rest of the world, known loosely as “globalization,” has come under attack. Much of the criticism is aimed at two international institutions that the United States helped create and lead: the International Monetary Fund, launched after World War II to provide emergency loans to countries with temporary balance-of-payments problems, and the World Trade Organization, created in 1995 during the last round of world trade negotiations, primarily to help settle trade disputes among countries.

The attacks on both institutions are varied and often inconsistent. But they clearly have taken their toll. For all practical purposes, the IMF is not likely to have its resources augmented any time soon by Congress (and thus by other national governments). Meanwhile, the failure of the WTO meetings in Seattle last December to produce even a roadmap for future trade negotiations—coupled with the protests that soiled the proceedings—has thrown a wrench into plans to reduce remaining barriers to world trade and investment.

For better or worse, it is now up to the United States, as it has been since World War II, to help shape the future of both organizations and arguably the course of the global economy. A broad consensus appears to exist here and elsewhere that governments should strive to improve the stability of the world economy and to advance living standards. But the consensus breaks down over how to do so. As the United States prepares to pick a new president and a new Congress, citizens and policymakers should be asking how best to promote stability and growth in the years ahead.

Unilateralism

6 0
3 years ago
BRAINLIEST ANSWERRR
kifflom [539]
I believe it's D. He represented the british soldiers 
4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Did gilman think it was natural for women to be economically dependent on men? why or why not
    13·1 answer
  • General import tax on items such as lead, glass, paper called the __.
    14·2 answers
  • Who denied the colonists basic rights according to the declaration
    14·1 answer
  • Slaves were brought to the United States in the early 1600s. true false
    14·1 answer
  • ____________ is a representation by drawing or painting.
    15·1 answer
  • Why did Ashoka the Great turn to the teachings of the Buddha?
    10·2 answers
  • Which statement about the claim is true
    7·1 answer
  • The Espionage and Sedition Acts of 1917 and 1918
    14·2 answers
  • Help me guysssss I neeed help I’m in 6 th grade don’t know
    6·2 answers
  • Why did news of the 1492 voyage of columbus spread rapidly in europe?
    6·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!