Answer:
Built it with proper research and study and give it to capable parties to collect fund and construct. Give it directly to the Indian companiesBuilt it with capital of Nepali people. If minister Kamal Thapa was serious about number 3 then obviously it is going to benefit Nepali in long term.
it's advantages
Budhiganga Hydropower Project aims at contributing to the social and economic development of Nepal through increasing electricity generation capacity of the country which will help to meet the load demand and reduce the load shedding by developing the Budhi Ganga Hydroelectric Power Project.
The correct answer is Fourth Amendment protections. <span>The </span>Fourth Amendment<span> is part of the Bill of Rights. It was added to the Constitution on December 15, 1791 to protect American citizens from unlawful searches and seizures which have now been authorized by the Patriot Act</span><span>.</span>
It would be more logical to have an abundant amount of resources than to be in a center of a training route. Thomas Jefferson's Embargo Act of 1807 is an example. America suffered more even though it was meant to punish France and Great Britain. If America had more supplies then they wouldn't have any issue with trading with someone else. America is across the sea so it is hard to believe they were in the center of the training route.
Having a good location is important, but if there isn't enough to trade then that creates more issues. One would be that the area could become a reputation for being unreliable. It does come to the question if the loads of resources is worth traveling for or to take a route that's faster but there isn't a lot of give. Being isolated also means that of there happens to be an issue in the trade then the location is either off the maps or people don't want to there because of the distance and the prices might be able to go up. That's why resources are better than location.
<span>This shows that there is a statistically significant difference between the two parties on the idea. The null hypothesis would have shown that there is no difference in the two parties. Party affiliation, then, will likely be indicative of the level of a person's support for the concept of welfare reform.</span>
This would be a perfect example of whistle-blowing.
Whistle-blowing is an act of exposing the corrupt, illegal or even unethical practices, conducts and activities of the organization, either public or private, by an individual who is an employee of the the said organization. The person doing the act is called a whistleblower. They do this by either presenting the evidence to the higher ups or to the law enforcing agencies. The press is also an option.
