When exploring if the poverty line is set at a realistic level, .a. conservatives argue that the poverty line is set at too low level, noting that they believe total needs from spending on food is incorrect b. liberals argue that the poverty line is set at too high a level, noting that the USDA itself estimates that only 10% of the persons spending the amount allowed in the economy food budget are able to get a nutritionally adequate diet. c. progressives argue that the poverty line needs to be dismantled, no baseline should be set for defining poverty. d. None of the above

Answer

d) None of the above

Explanation

All the options, but d, are incorrect because they misinterpret different political stances with their opinion on whether the poverty line is set a realistic level. Below, you will find an explanation of why each option is wrong.

a) "Conservatives argue that the poverty line is set at too low level, noting that they believe total needs from spending on food is incorrect."

Conservative are aligned to laissez-faire economics, but not to the extent of liberals. This means that conservatives would be more aligned to option b, believing that it is the individual´s duty to ensure his/her wellbeing and therefore, it would be important to reduce government benefits.

Option "a)" is more aligned with progressive political standpoint.

b) "Liberals argue that the poverty line is set at too high a level, noting that the USDA itself estimates that only 10% of the persons spending the amount allowed in the economy food budget are able to get a nutritionally adequate diet."

Liberals believe in laissez-faire economics. This means that there should not be a poverty line, as this may create distortions on free market. Option "b)" is more aligned with conservative stances.

c) "progressives argue that the poverty line needs to be dismantled, no baseline should be set for defining poverty"

Progressive stances believe the State should intervene the market to correct its inherent tendency to produce inequalities and wealth concentration. In other words, the State should ensure mechanism for wealth re-distribution that the market alone cannot provide. This means that they would never agree with dismantle the poverty line, as it is a mechanism of wealth redistribution. This stance is more aligned with liberals.

usually, however, secession was popular enough without the of community leaders. prominent unionists, on the other hand, were a major reason that texas did not secede before march 1861. the most important of these was sam houston, the governor of the state from 1859 to 1861.

can i have brainlest