They lost five of their ports to the US
The correct answer is B.
Milton Friedman (1912 - 2006) was an economist who received the 1976 Nobel Prize in Economics for his studies in consumption analysis, monetary history and complex theories related to stabilization, including goverment intervention policies.
Presidents such as Hoover or Coolidge, who had governed in the decade before the Great Depression, supported laisez-faire economic measures, that consisted on free functioning of the markets with minimum goverment interventionism. Markets alone, would produce the most efficent outcomes, according to his viewpoint. Therefore, the policies introduced by these governments, involved minimum government regulation of the economic activity by the goverment.
<u>This is why Friedman, such as many others, claimed for alternative policies which involved goverment intervention for stabilization purpouses, using the mechanisms of the fiscal policy.</u> Subsequent goverments did apply such measures, being the best example the New Deal, based on Keynesian economics and implemented by President Roosevelt. The New Deal aimed to create job positions for the large unemployed sectors of the US population, by increasing public expenditure (one of the variables of the fiscal policy) in public works and hence, creating employment to undertake those works.
Answer:
Another name for Africa is the dark continent. It is called Motherland because it is the birth place of the first ancestors of all Humans
Answer:
Explanation:
The problem is they don't. One day you will take a history class that talks about Hiroshima or the Holocaust. They were both tragedies of a kind that is almost impossible to record with no bias.
But what would happen if you read the history from another point of view. Suppose, which I don't think has been done in any school in North America, you were to read about Hiroshima from the point of view of the Japanese. What have they said about it? What will they teach their children? What is the folklore about it from their point of view? Undoubtedly their best historians will record it without bias, but will be the same as what we read? I'm not entirely sure.
That does not answer your question, but I have grave doubts that it is possible. Personal bias always comes into everything. I will say this about your question: we must do our best to present the facts in an unbiased manner. That's important because we need to have a true picture of what happened. Many times it is because historians don't want humanity committing the same errors as the events they are trying to make sense of.
So far we have not dropped an atomic weapon on anyone else. But there have been holocausts after the European one. What have we learned? That six million is a number beyond our understanding, and we have not grasped the enormity of the crime, bias or no bias.
