Answer:
i think its d definitely not b tho
He supported it by simply signing the paper of the Indian Removal Act, this was proposed in late February 1830.
The available options are:
(1) Economic competition is inefficient and wasteful.
(2) Strong labor unions are essential to the health of the economy.
(3) Natural resources belong to all citizens and should not be used for private gain.
(4) Concentrating economic power in the hands of a few individuals is a threat to the country.
Answer:
Economic competition is inefficient and wasteful
Explanation:
The statement best describes an attitude shared by John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, and J. P. Morgan is "Economic competition is inefficient and wasteful."
This is evident in the fact that all these three aforementioned wealthy Americans were popularly known for their tendency to develop any form of monopoly in their various business industry.
To them, the existence of economic competition leads to inefficiency. Hence, they always prefer to eliminate the competition, before committing massive investments for the needed growth and development, instead of outwitting the competitors.
Answer:
1) Czar you would not be happy about the revolvolution as it was supposed to remove his power. As workers you would be happy, and hope for some better rights and living conditions. The soldiers were probably tired of war, and maybe wanted to come back home.
2) A treaty should try and bring peace and stability. A classic example is the treaty of versailles where it is a cause of WW2, it broke the german economy and country with the restriction. Maybe if the treaty were better for Germany we may not have had WW2.
3) If you were germany you would be angry that all the blame is put on you. You will find it unfair you have to pay a big amount of money to the other countries. The treaty feels like a big hard push for Germany, and is a reason WW2 started, and how Hitler managed to grab the power in Germany.
