<span>The
success of both would be strongly contributed to by a great deal of
luck to begin with. This luck pertains to having the right conditions
under which to produce the food and water necessary to support large
civilizations and communities. The power and force to gain large areas
of land to be drawn into the civilization. The power and force to keep
control of neighboring captured and incorporated lands. The dedication
of the people, normally gained by having the power and force to provide
them with safe and contented lives without worry of invasion and
destruction. Without such power and growing force (military) the
civilization would have been a single community or oasis in the desert.
Seeing that the fledgling civilization would survive, there was a need
for accounting for all the food and supplies collected from the outer
regions so they invented writing and a written record to keep track
with. This forced organization and removed a great deal of chance
related to luck and thus yielded a stronger and more powerful nation.
With which more land could be conquered and absorbed into the realm of
the nation</span>
has more vote than any other candidate in the constituency
Answer:
all of the above
Explanation:
lightning, hail, tornados, etc are all associated with thunderstorms.
Answer:
True
Explanation:
An organization has various departments and each department has data which tells how much work that goes on in it.
The data of all the departments normally has a central unit in which all the data from the various department is looked into and processed. Such data may include the total number of workers or the total amount of goods produced.
The companies normally need this information to plan ahead and to have accurate information of the progress going on in the company.
Answer:
DeBondt and Thaler (1985) found that the poorest-performing stocks in one time period experienced <u>good</u> performance in the following period and that the best-performing stocks in one time period experienced <u>poor</u> performance in the following time period.
Explanation:
In their 1985 paper <em>Does the Stock Market Overreact?</em>, economists Werner DeBondt and Richard Thaler analyzed the performance of the stock market and found out that people were falling for what is called the "hot hand fallacy", where people think (erroneously) that what has been happening in recent times will continue to happen indefinitely. In the stock market, this leads to people thinking poor-performing stocks will continue to perform poorly, while good-performing stocks will continue to perform positively. However, empirical research doesn't support this, as they found out that <u>the poorest-performing stocks in one time period experienced </u><u>good</u><u> performance in the following period and that the best-performing stocks in one time period experienced </u><u>poor</u><u> performance in the following time period.</u> But many investors found themselves on the wrong end of poor trades because they fell for the hot hand fallacy.
