None of these conclusions is valid.
- The first one implies that people either think that their employer should cover part of the health insurance costs (as said in the original sentence), or they think that the employer should pay 100%. This is not correct because there are other possible opinions people can have, like thinking that the employer shouldn't pay for anything, for example.
- The second conclusion is invalid for the same reason: it implies that people can only either think that the employer should pay a large part, or that the employer shouldn't pay anything. It is not considering other options.
- The third conclusion does not work either because it is referring to what people think about <em>the amount </em>of the costs themselves, whereas the original topic was <em>how</em> they are paid for.
No, there can be no equality if there is separation. Take for example segregation, where African Americans were separated from whites in public facilities like schools and restaurants. The two groups of people did not receive equal treatment, and therefore there was no true equality.
Rivers, mountain ranges, historical points (railway, a wall, etc.)
Most country borders are divided by geographical points, and sometime just for political and historical reasons (what belonged, and waht should belong to whom).
Hope it helped,
Happy homework/ study/ exam!
Answer:
the united states hoped the containment policy would help contain communism in other countries. Such as in the Vietnam war, The Korean War, in China, and in Russia.
Explanation:
Answer:
When added to ice, salt first dissolves in the film of liquid water that is always present on the surface, and lowering its freezing point below the ices temperature. Ice in contact with salty water therefore melts, creating more liquid water, which dissolves more salt, thereby causing more ice to melt, and so on.
