Answer:
The correct answer is B.bargain in order to obtain the property rights of the gopher habitat.
Explanation:
In economics, the Coase Theorem states that in a market where transaction costs are negligible, a dispute between parties where property rights are involved will lead to a bargaining process where the party that gives the most value to whatever it's in dispute will end up winning rights over that property. In this case, the environmental group assigns great value to protecting the habitat of the Wyoming pocker gopher, but they can only fully secure its well-being by securing property rights over said habitat, and given their standing, they can expect to bargain or negotiate successfully. Any other option, like protesting, boycotting, or lobbying, won't be good enough to achieve their goals.
Answer:
Overcrowding
<span>Sewage systems
Tenement houses</span>
Explanation:
Since many people crammed into small areas in order to be close to the factories in which they worked you had overcrowding and tenement houses. Also in the early stages they tend to have problems with sewage systems which caused a lot of sickness and bad smelling streets.
Answer:
To support any claim, we need evidence that is in favor. And they are the arguments and explanations that best supports the claim. And those which does not supports the claim, leave the claim uncertain. And different debates will have a different list of evidence and reasons which support, and also a list that does not support the claim. Hence, first find the issue, which is the claim, and then find out what supports and what does not support the claim. And then you can put your words forward. That is the correct way to participate in a healthy debate. Remember, you should either support the claim, or you should be against the claim. And you will have to stick to it till the very end, supporting it with your thoughts and evidence that you can collect while preparing for the debate. The better you prepare, the healthier it is going to be the debate. And you should never be 50-50. You should either agree or disagree. Like if you are debating on climate change, you can either support it or not support it. The bushfire in Australia is a fact that supports, and you can pick it up if you are supporting, and economic loss is a fact that does not support it. You can pick that fact if you do not support it. The point is, you should put forward strong facts, And that makes a debate healthier.
Explanation:
Please check the answer.
Answer:
First off be yourself because if they dont like you for beimg yourself whts the point to liking them. i had to learn the hard way
