Answer:
B
Explanation: I don't know, I mean it seems sensible but i want to be a lawyer when i grow up and it looks like the disadvantage would be conflicts because say both owners decide on selling it, and owner A wants to sell it for lets say $450 and owner B wants to sell it for $750 that right there would be a conflict and could lead to in some cases a break of the contract they signed which can lead to court and all that stuff but the advantage would be that you could have many expert partners like the answer says and they could correct you on your mistakes, lets go back to the imaginary problem i made up. Owner A wants to sell the object for $450 dollars and owner B wants to sell it for $750 but Owner A is a more experienced and shows owner B that it was worth that but its been used so therefore you should lower the price and it would be easier to sell. (sorry if i sound stupid I wouldn't recommend using that as the answer but if you decide to please tell me if i'm right or wrong also I'm 12 so...)
The argument that might be used by someone who supports strict campaign finance laws is that Corporations and labor unions that have too much power.
Financial law is defined as the law and standard or regulation of the derivatives, insurance, commercial banking, investment management sectors, and capital markets.
The people that support the strict campaign finance laws are the companies or corporations and the labor unions because they have a too much power in the finance laws.
learn more about the finance laws here
brainly.com/question/515053
#SPJ4
Explanation:
In mediation, parties agree to work together, but under the guidance of a trained mediator. ... Through negotiation, parties are able to bind themselves in an agreement. A mediator, on the other hand, doesn't have decision-making power and doesn't hand down a ruling like an arbitrator or a judge might.
Answer:
in my opinion United States government today is just and legimate
