Answer:
The federal government ensures the cooperation of state and local governments by providing funds to help them implement important programs. For example, grants-in-aid are federal funds given to state and local governments for specific projects, such as airport construction or pollution control. The government receiving the funds must meet certain standards and conditions, and must often provide some money of its own for the project. Grant-in-aid projects are subject to supervision by the federal government. In the same way, states work with local governments to assure the quality of life in the United States. For example, stores and businesses must obey many state laws that require good business practices. State health regulations protect people eating at local restaurants. State education requirements ensure that all students in the state are offered the same education. For the same reason, workers in local factories and mines are protected by state inspectors who ensure that the industries obey all safety regulations. State bank inspectors help ensure that bank accounts are safe and that banks are following state and federal banking regulations.
um hope this helps
This is in my opinion one of the aspects that makes the central courts and the different lines of thought within a single subject so interesting. The clash of ideas that we have in this case is a perfect example.
On one side we have those who look at the current 30 million uninsured Americans, which include millions in Texas, and the undeniable success it had in Massachusetts. Most of them conclude that this mandate is a government success.
On the other hand, we can find those who believe that this is a terrible invasion of the government to the citizen's free will to choose their own healthcare options, they see government overreach, and at the same time an unprecedented intrusion on individual liberties to which there is no justification.
Unfortunately this is something that millions of Americans have been forced into. It's evident how they refused to create a public health care system, and instead give more power to the private sector.
After this short debate of ideas, I will give you one question to ponder on: Which principle is more important? Your freedom, your civil liberties, and your freedom from the government line of thought, or the possibilty of providing health care to millions of uninsured Americans?
I hope this solves your question!
Answer:
During the World War 1 the US were allies to the countries affected during the War by supplying food and giving them aid by send troops and other resources which helped the allies win the war
Explanation:
WWI was largely a stalemate until the US entered the war. Its large population and many resources tipped the balance and allowed the Allied Powers to win the war soon after the US entered. ... The American troops were fresh because we didn't join the war until April 1917. Our rested troops were a big asset for the Allies.
Do you mean the conflict between 1853 and 1853?
All the parties in this conflict were:
The Ottoman Empire (today's Turkey), which had an alliance with France, United Kingdom and the Kingdom of Sardinia (which was only part of Italy in 1861).
Their opponent was Russia.
Answer:
post colonialism is the theoretical wing of postcoloniality. it refers to a mode of reading,political, analysis and cultural resistance/intervention that deals with the history of colonialism and present neo - colonial structures.
