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
klasskru [66]
2 years ago
5

HELP ASAP!!!!!!! What happened to the European colonies, by 1830?

History
1 answer:
Alex_Xolod [135]2 years ago
6 0

Answer:

the devastated nations of Western Europe could no longer afford to exert such global influence and as global norms shifted against them.

Explanation:

You might be interested in
Do yu think andrew jackson was a good president
BigorU [14]
Yes I sure do :) do you?
4 0
3 years ago
In which direction would you travel to go in a straight line from Australia to Europe?
Alex

Southwest if you think about how the globe is formed, then that would be your answer!

8 0
3 years ago
Using your economic knowledge and your research, compose a 350- to 450-word editorial that evaluates the effectiveness of these
NemiM [27]

Answer:

The benefits of trade agreements are not felt evenly by all industries in an economy. In fact, even member nations gain varying advantages by entering into trade agreements. However, despite these drawbacks, the United States continues to act on its commitment to free trade. In 2005, the United States signed a fair trade agreement (FTA) with Australia, and in 2012, it signed a trade protection agreement (TPA) with Colombia. Both agreements have been in force for a while. Now the question is, Have these agreements benefited the US economy? Let’s examine the impact of the bilateral agreements with Colombia and Australia on the US economy.

According to the USTR, the International Trade Commission (ITC) predicted that the United States–Colombia TPA would increase national GDP by $2.5 billion (Office of the US Trade Representative). Under the TPA, US exports to Colombia increased from $12.0 billion in 2010 to $18.3 billion in 2013 (US Department of State). The TPA seems to have delivered on its promise, because according to the USTR, US exports to Colombia increased by 30% in 2013 (Office of the US Trade Representative). So financially, Colombia is a lucrative market for the United States. However, the main opposition to the TPA stemmed from concerns about the terrible labor conditions in Colombia and the violent threats to those seeking to improve labor conditions in a country rife with crime. Although violence is a major concern, the FTA will eventually help both nations by bringing about social and labor reforms through economic activity. By helping Colombia become a peaceful country, the United States can pave the way for increased trade with Colombia in the future.

The United States–Australia FTA received considered opposition in both countries. US dairy farmers, ranchers, and small farmers were anxious about job losses resulting from the free entry of Australian products into the US market. However, if we judge by the boost in exports, the FTA has contributed to overall US economic growth. According to the USTR, in the first five years of the FTA, US exports to Australia increased by 33% (Office of the US Trade Representative). The FTA removed all tariffs on American imports into Australia, giving US exporters barrier-free entry into Australian markets.

The export industry plays a key role in driving economic growth and generating jobs in the United States. Colombia and Australia are two large and important markets for US exporters. The United States faces competition from other nations for access to these markets. By signing trade agreements, American goods can compete effectively in these markets. Although the agreements with Colombia and Australia are opposed for valid reasons, the agreements will benefit the US economy over time

Explanation:

4 0
2 years ago
I need help ASAP!! Please !!!
Keith_Richards [23]
When in doubt choose c.....
4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Why were the offending missiles, originally placed in Cuba?
Ne4ueva [31]
B. <span>To deter an invasion from the United States and to Counter the U.S. missiles in Europe and Turkey... Because the U.S. had missiles in Turkey they could threaten the soviets so to counter that they placed missiles in Cuba.</span>
6 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • PLZ HELP MEH!!!!! 
    14·2 answers
  • By about how much did the US increase in size with the addition of the Louisiana purchase?
    15·1 answer
  • Cheese pizza is better that vegetables pizza . Is that a subjective or a objective ?
    10·2 answers
  • Dred Scott ____
    13·1 answer
  • What primarily contributed to the rise of Hinduism?
    12·1 answer
  • Which modern day countries did the roman empire comprise of?
    13·1 answer
  • Why is the loess problematic for the yellow river?
    5·2 answers
  • The 1803 landmark supreme court case marbury v. madison established the principle of
    6·1 answer
  • Examine the charts below showing the amount of consumer goods produced
    7·1 answer
  • What was the significance of this statement?
    9·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!