Answer:
There is little doubt that the widespread use of the automobile, especially after 1920, changed the rural and urban landscapes in America. It is overly simplistic to assume, however, that the automobile was the single driving force in the transformation of the countryside or the modernization of cities. In some ways automobile transport was a crucial agent for change, but in other cases it merely accelerated ongoing changes.
In several respects, the automobile made its impact felt first in rural areas where cars were used for touring and recreation on the weekends as opposed to replacing existing transit that brought people to and from work in urban areas. Some of the earliest paved roads were landscaped parkways along scenic routes. Of course, rural people were not always very pleased when urban drivers rutted unpaved roads, kicked up dust, and generally frightened or even injured livestock. Yet, cars potentially could help confront rural problems—isolation, the high cost of transporting farm products, and the labor of farm work. Although farmers may have resisted the automobile at first, by the 1920s per capita automobile ownership favored the rural family. Adoption was uneven in rural areas, however, depending on income, availability of cars, the continuing reliance on horses, and other factors. Automobile manufacturers did not lose sight of this market and courted potential customers with advertisements touting that cars were “Built for Country Roads” or promoting vehicles that would lead to “The Passing of the Horse.”
Explanation:
hope it helps LOLOLOOOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Pax romana, is an expression in Latin used to refer to the long period of stability that lived the Roman Empire, characterized by both its inner calm and its external security, which allowed it to reach its maximum economic development and territorial expansion. This period developed approximately between the fourth civil war and the crisis of the third century,
-
A senator: The charming think about the advance of our society, without having to worry about the wars of the past, the invasions or the extreme poverty
- A public official: Of course, Mr. Senator, at this moment we are in charge of communicating, and writing philosophical notes.
- A merchant: Yes, at the moment I only travel and trade with foreigners, I can bring valuable fabrics and artifacts, without fear of the thieves and the classic ambushes of our enemies.
- A former soldier: it makes me very happy that my children do not have to suffer what I suffered, offering my life to our nation, it is good to see them at home working the land and not on the battlefield.
- A slave: For you the situation is more than good, but we, the slaves, continue oppressed and without rights.
Explicit: Stated clearly and in detail, leaving no room for confusion or doubt. the closing words of a text, manuscript, early printed book, or chanted liturgical text. For example: "the speaker's intentions were not made explicit.
Implicit: Implied though not plainly expressed. With no qualification or question; absolute. Not expressed directly in terms of independent variables. These two words have almost opposite meanings but are regularly confused because of their similar sound. Since they do have such different meanings, you want to be sure that you're using the right one. Keep this in mind: Implicit is indirect; and Explicit is direct. Here is something that might help you to remember the difference in both these words. Remember this and you won't ever fall short when thinking, "Is it Implicit or Explicit?" A good way to keep explicit vs implicit apart is to remember that Iimplicit is an Implied or Indirect statement. Both of these start with the letter "I". Explicit starts with an "E" and is spelled out, so there is no confusion. Implicit and Explicit have near opposite meanings, so it's important to remember their difference. Implicit is indirectly stated or implied. Explicit is directly stated and spelled out.
I hope this helps and sorry I went over 100 I checked and its 200 words!!!!
