<p>sorry if this is answered already. did anyone get what the declaration was about?</p>
<p>was it about the enlightenment thinkers or the problems between Britain and the colonies?</p>
<p>Advocated of New South wanted increase in wage to attract people right??? Idk, that’s what I put.</p>
<p>according to my barron’s book, “raising revenue” as opposed to just “revenue” was a serious conceptual problem for colonists. There are obvious issues arising from a “revenue-raising scheme,” most notably the loss of the “power of the purse from the colonial assemblies.” In this specific passage, because “raising revenue” is a such a major problem by itself, I think taxation w/o representation would not be the BEST answer. Clearly, one is being stressed more than the other and that is “raising revenue.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t think it was either of those choices. But I don’t remember the other choices - what were they?</p>
<p>Address grievances to the King.</p>
<p>^I can confirm that</p>
<p>^What they said.</p>
<h1>28 is almost definitely rights and privileges, its like an example of the magna carta sort of agreement, and having the same rights as english citizens and wanting their rights defined and written down. plus i dont think there were any other logical answers.</h1>
<p>
</p>
<p>In fact, taxation w/o rep. was not stressed at all, for the very reason that I have mentioned, that it would have made the question seem too easy.</p>
<p>As for “raising revenue” being an issue, you have to keep the time period in mind. After the Stamp Act of 1765, colonists were seriously ****ed off. Every taxation thereafter was closely tied to the argument of representation. </p>
<p>In the passage, one could easily tell the colonist was fuming. But wouldn’t it be more logical to be ticked off over system as a whole and not the man working for the system? Sort of like being mad at Standard Oil and not at monopoly as a whole.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Physically expanded city. There’s a consolidated list now, refer to it (you can thank Harambee).</p>
<p>You are extrapolating too much from what was suggested in the passage. The fact that virtual representation was not even slightly alluded to will invalidate it as the correct answer.</p>
<p>this is eye opening</p>
<p>thanks for whom ever posted this years curve/ranges</p>
<p>:)</p>
<p>So–15 more?</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Women in 19th century - clerical workers</p></li>
<li><p>Most women in the 1860s worked in textiles/garment industries</p></li>
</ol>
<p>This is the same question ^
We have two different answers on the consolidated list.</p>
<p>(personally, I think it’s the textiles/garments)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You can thank DBQs for that.</p>
<p>? About Harry Truman
I think one of the choices was stand up against McCarty which was wrong.</p>
<p>Is the one about the two writers Crane and Dresier on there
I believe the answer was that the wrote about social problems on the streets</p>
<p>46 and 31 were different questions i think…</p>
<p>Oh, were they different? I thought they were both asking what job women in the 1800s most commonly held.
I remember people discussing that one in the first few pages, and I think we decided on textiles.</p>
<p>But maybe i’m mistaken. Can anyone confirm?</p>
<p>List makers add the Crane and Dresier i dont think its there</p>
<p>We still haven’t added Crane and Dreiser to the list, but I don’t know what the answer is.</p>