Gezon and Kottak argue that the relatively high incidence of expanded family households among poorer North Americans is
"an adaptation to poverty".
A significantly more typical response from researchers, in any case, was to recommend that discussing the way of life of the underclass was commensurate to "faulting the victim." Bad conduct and poor decisions, in this view, were a justifiable adaptation to poverty and the absence of chance in individuals' lives. In spite of the fact that my examination on the underclass was given a neighborly gathering, the greater part of the scholarly network has mixed around the view that awful practices are a result, as opposed to a reason, of poverty.
Answer:
It is important because knowing for yourself is much better than leaning on other people, or the internet for support. It would be very hard to have an opinion about something, or even have a conversation without having an understanding of it first.
Explanation:
America was the only major industrial nation that was not devastated by war. The economy benefited from an expanding internal market and heavy investment in research and development
Is this a true or false question
