Answer: by using local property taxes to fund public schools, trapping poor children in poor schools
Explanation: Jonathan Kozol is an American writer, educator, and activist best known for his publications on public education in the United States. In savage inequalities, Kozol pointed out how students from poor family background are trapped in poorly funded schools since public school funding comes from local property taxes which vary widely between communities.
The basis of Kozol's argument is the comparisons between rich and poor school districts, in particular the amount of money spent per child. School districts with relatively wealthy property-owners are spending over $20,000 per year per child while school districts where poor people live spend about $11,000 per year per child.
The pertinent question he asks is whether it is fair or right that the place of one's birth or residence should determine the quality of education a child is entitled to.
I would say D. Most consumers didn't stay away from the company
because if your trying to boycott something then you are protesting against that company and you are not using whatever that company has, so if the consumers didn't stay away then they would still use and be around the company and that is not the purpose of boycotting
Hope this helps!! :D
The purpose of examples are to help your teacher reinforce, personalize, and clarify ideas so these<u> are all correct. </u>
<h3>Purpose of examples </h3>
- They clarify the idea by giving a scenario where the idea is applied.
- They reinforce the idea by relating it to a scenario that allows easy remembrance.
They also personalize ideas when they relate the scenario to a relevant event that allows for the listeners to understand the idea better.
In conclusion, option D is correct.
Find out more on clarifying ideas at brainly.com/question/2224789.