Love of wisdom (philos) and beloved (sophia)
<u>The situations of market inefficiency are the following</u>
- Consumers wait in line to buy a sale television because the first to come is the first served.
- Consumers gain access to goods through a lottery or wining a contest.
In both situations there is an excess of demand (shortage of offer) beacuse the marketa are inefficient in terms of allocating the goods and services to all the consumers that are demanding them. Rationing mechanisms have to be implemented instead, operating under specific sets of rules such as: "first come, first served", or through the organization of a lottery.
<u>The other two situations do not reflect market inefficiency</u>
- Consumers compete for wages in a free market economy.
Markets are freely functioning and it does not mentioned any disequilibrium situation that involves inefficiencies.
- Consumers all agree and decide to produce certain products they need and want.
A group of consumers decides to become producers and perform the economic roles of this economic agent. This is the everyday life in markets.
The first and second questions should be answered by you according to your classes. You should think of: how was President Andrew Jackson elected (1828)? What was he famous for before his candidacy? And according to this, what could be expected from his speech? Jackson was famous for his military victories over Indian tribes and for working actively on the occupation of previous Indian land. Thus his defense of the Indian Removal and his feelings of superiority over Indians wasn’t surprising.
On his opinions about the United States being better in 1830, it is due to an authoritarian view according to which the ways of the Indian’s – who preferred their territories covered with forests – were inferior to the ways of the Americans’, supposedly full of cities, Art, happy people, liberty, civilization, and religion.
Since President Jackson wasn’t thinking from the point of view of the Indians, for whom the relationship with their territory was fundamental, he thought Indians would be happy being left in peace away from the whites and free to live their own way.
He also thought Indians would be glad about this policy for believing it was “kind and generous” as the Indian Removal Act compromised to pay for the Indian’s immigration and for their first year in new territory. That was an offer, he said, “our own people would gladly embrace… on such conditions”, referring to the whites occupying lands east of the Mississipi River.
In order to predict what Elias Boudinot said about Indian Removal you should remember that he was a member of the Cherokee Nation where he was part of a minority who believed their nation would have more chances of surviving if they integrated themselves into the American society. This explains why Boudinot was in favor of Indians making treaties with the United States and willingly giving up on their lands.
Answer:
The author's purpose in writing this article is to elucidate the tragic and vicious manner in which Japan committed a genocide on the Chinese nation. The author wrote, " But what was exorbitant -and terrifying- about the Second Sino Japanese war were the heinous crimes committed by the Japanese military which reached depths of depravity unmatched in modern warfare." This shows that the crimes committed by the Japanese were heinous and the author detailed most of them.
Explanation:
This CommonLit article by Mike Kubic provides an insight into the atrocities committed by the Japanese nation on China from the late 1800's to 1945. These atrocities show the ease with which young minds can be easily influenced to hate a whole people and inflict harm on them. The author of the article vividly described the manner in which these crimes were committed.
Japanese attack was spurred by just hatred of the Chinese nation and a greed for the resources of other nations to motivate their own agenda. They were only stopped after the attack of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
