American jobs would be lost because globalization encourages worldwide distribution of products, which also distributes jobs across the world. For example, Ford Motors almost built a factory in Mexico due to the encouragement by the US government to increase globalization as it would be cheaper.
This is a matter of opinion. Do YOU think the atomic bomb on Hiroshima was worth it? Let's look at the factors.
What were some of the positives? Well, firstly, it ended World War II. That's kind of a big deal. In fact, it caused Japan not only to surrender, but UNCONDITIONALLY surrender. Basically, that means the US could ask Japan to do whatever it liked--which the US liked! Secondly, it was a triumph of science. The atomic bomb was a revolutionary work of science. Nothing like it had ever been made before, and it was all based on secrecy and theoretical science. The atomic bomb also <span>provided the basis for new, improved weapons, including the hydrogen bomb. </span>Thirdly, it helped establish the United States as a world power. Knowing about this super powerful weapon the US had, countries were likely to back off!
But there's a lot of negatives here, too. Keep in mind that most of these benefits were for the United States alone. Of course, there was one other BIG negative for the United States, and that's cost. The atomic bomb was worth billions of dollars! A second big one wasn't so much for the United States as for the world, especially Japan. When the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, the effects on the people and city were devastating. People were vaporized. Cities and buildings were flattened, and nothing is left but carnage. People died, their skin peeling off, from cancer and radiation. It was awful! Thirdly, it caused the arms race. Knowing the US had this super weapon, ALL the countries started building their own. Now, we pretty much live in fear of all the nuclear weapons there are today--which are hundreds of times more powerful each than the first bomb!
So what do you think? Was it worth it?
Answer:
The Constitution will be approved if it has all the necessary materials.
Explanation:
As a Federalist, I will ratify or approve the Constitution if it has all the necessary materials that is needed to run the country efficiently otherwise it will not be approve at all.
The government is set up under the Constitution by composing of three branches which is the legislative, executive, and judicial. Without these three branches the government will not formed and perform its function.
My point of view on including of a bill of rights is that it is a very important and necessary part of the constitution, without bill of rights the constitution is incomplete.
I disagree with the opposing position of the Anti-Federalist because they are against of more power of the federal government over the states.
Answer:
In a four-way contest, the Republican Party ticket of Abraham Lincoln and Hannibal Hamlin, absent from the ballot in ten slave states, won a national popular plurality, a popular majority in the North where states already had abolished slavery, and a national electoral majority comprising only Northern electoral votes.Explanation:
