History
History, 19.02.2020 21:30, ComicSans10

Taken from a historian writing in 2000.
The prosperity of the Coolidge era was huge, real, widespread but not ubiquitous and unprecedented. It was not permanent - what prosperity ever is? But it is foolish and unhistorical to judge it insubstantial because we now know what followed later. At the
time it was as solid as houses built, meals eaten, automobiles
driven, cash spent and property acquired. Prosperity was more
widely distributed in the America of the 1920s than had been possible in any community of this size before, and it involved the
acquisition, by tens of millions of ordinary families, of an economic
security that had been denied them throughout all previous
history.
How far do you agree with this interpretation?
Use Extract C, Sources A and B and your own knowledge to explain
your answer.
(16 marks)

answer
Answers: 2

Other questions on the subject: History

image
History, 21.06.2019 21:00, Lalawhite1082
What do you think was a drawback to this method of calculating distance
Answers: 2
image
History, 21.06.2019 21:30, wambold3
What is zinn's approach to the study of history? what does he suggest occurs when history is told is the story of human progress?
Answers: 1
image
History, 21.06.2019 22:00, hardwick744
Which did president carter refuse to do in his attempt to free american hostages taken by iran?
Answers: 1
image
History, 22.06.2019 02:30, kharmaculpepper
What were three advantages the north had in the civil war? it was fighting most battles on home ground. it had a greater number of soldiers. it had more highly skilled military leaders. it had a stronger navy. it had a better network of railroads. pick three .
Answers: 1
Do you know the correct answer?
Taken from a historian writing in 2000.
The prosperity of the Coolidge era was huge, real, wid...

Questions in other subjects:

Konu
Mathematics, 09.01.2020 22:31