Acountry rejects fdi proposals in certain industries. it does so because the tangible advantages of such investments are lesser than potential costs like loss of employment and reduction of overall well-being. however, it aggressively pursues inviting foreign investments in sectors like infrastructure, education, and health care because of the benefits that accrue with them. which political view of fdi is discussed in this example?

Eter lives in a beautiful region. peter and other residents of his region use water from the river that flows through their region. recently, mark industries decided to set up their chemical plant near that river. peter realized that the waste from the chemical plant would pollute the river. he decided to seek a legal ordinance that would restrict the use of land near that river for specific use only. which type of zoning will peter and his region?

In the case of furman v. georgia (1972), the united states supreme court ruled that the death penalty- in specific cases- being arbitrarily and inconsistently imposed, often in a discriminatory manner. as a result, the imposition of the death penalty as a punishment was stopped throughout the united states.

Athief was passing by a house under construction when he noticed that the ladder being used by workers on the roof had copper braces supporting the rungs. after making sure that the workers on the roof could not see him, the thief used pliers that he had in his pocket to remove all of the copper braces that he could reach from the ground. a short time later, a worker climbed down the ladder and it collapsed. he fell to the ground and severely injured his back. the thief was apprehended a few hours later trying to sell the copper for scrap. a statute in the jurisdiction makes it a felony for "maliciously causing serious physical injury to another." the thief was charged with malicious injury under the statute and was also charged with larceny. after a jury trial in which the above facts were presented, he was convicted of both charges. if he appeals the conviction for the malicious injury charge on grounds of insufficient evidence, how should the court rule? a affirm the conviction, because the thief was engaged in criminal conduct at the time of the act that resulted in the injury. b affirm the conviction, because the jury could have found that the thief acted with malice. c reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief intended to injure anyone. d reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief bore any malice towards the workers on the roof.