United States Territorial Expansion
This information describes the history of territorial expansion of the United States.
1 An 1845 magazine article claimed that other nations have undertaken to intrude themselves into it [U.S, territorial expansion], ... for the avowed object of thwarting our policy and hampering our power, limiting our greatness and, checking the fulfillment of our manifest destiny to overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the free development of our yearly multiplying millions." The concept of the United States having a manifest destiny promoted the idea that territorial expansion was necessary and inevitable.
2. Past territorial acquisitions contributed to this belief. The 1783 Treaty of Paris ended the Revolutionary War and moved the nation's western border to the Mississippi River. The Louisiana Purchase doubled the size of the country. The Treaty of 1818 established the 49th parallel as the border between the U.S. and Canada. Che year later, Spanish cessions gave the nation territory on the Gulf of Mexico and
3 One year after the magazine article, a treaty with Great Britain divided the disputed Oregon Territory and extended the U.S. Canadian border along the 49th parallel. The signing of an 1848 treaty ended a war and added territory that would eventually make up all or part of seven western states. With the purchase of a nearly 30,000 square mile portion of Mexico in 1853, the borders of the continental United States were set.
What is the nearly 30,000 square mile acquisition known as?
- A. Alaska Purchase
- B. Hawaii Annexation
- C. Oregon Territory
- D. Gadsden Purchase
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: D
The Gadsden Purchase refers to the acquisition of approximately 30,000 square miles of land from Mexico in 1854, primarily to facilitate a southern transcontinental railroad. Option A, the Alaska Purchase, involved acquiring Alaska from Russia in 1867 and is significantly larger in area. Option B, the Hawaii Annexation, pertains to the annexation of Hawaii in 1898, which is not a land acquisition of this size. Option C, the Oregon Territory, was established through treaties in the mid-1800s but does not represent a single acquisition of 30,000 square miles. Thus, the Gadsden Purchase is uniquely defined by its specific size and historical context.
The Gadsden Purchase refers to the acquisition of approximately 30,000 square miles of land from Mexico in 1854, primarily to facilitate a southern transcontinental railroad. Option A, the Alaska Purchase, involved acquiring Alaska from Russia in 1867 and is significantly larger in area. Option B, the Hawaii Annexation, pertains to the annexation of Hawaii in 1898, which is not a land acquisition of this size. Option C, the Oregon Territory, was established through treaties in the mid-1800s but does not represent a single acquisition of 30,000 square miles. Thus, the Gadsden Purchase is uniquely defined by its specific size and historical context.
Other Related Questions
Which statement is true about the four countries that accepted the passengers?
- A. They had camps similar to those established by Germany.
- B. They were allies during World War II.
- C. They had Europe's largest populations prior to World War I.
- D. They each shared a border with Germany.
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: B
Option B is accurate as the four countries that accepted the passengers were indeed allies during World War II, collaborating against the Axis powers. Option A is incorrect because these countries did not establish camps similar to those in Germany; instead, they provided refuge to those fleeing persecution. Option C is misleading; while some of these countries had significant populations, they were not necessarily the largest in Europe prior to World War I. Option D is false as not all of the countries shared a border with Germany, which limits the applicability of this statement.
Option B is accurate as the four countries that accepted the passengers were indeed allies during World War II, collaborating against the Axis powers. Option A is incorrect because these countries did not establish camps similar to those in Germany; instead, they provided refuge to those fleeing persecution. Option C is misleading; while some of these countries had significant populations, they were not necessarily the largest in Europe prior to World War I. Option D is false as not all of the countries shared a border with Germany, which limits the applicability of this statement.
Assume that the state of Kansas passed a law limiting the number of hours teenagers could work on farms, and the state's farmers challenged the law. The decision in which of these cases could be cited in support of Kansas's law?
- A. Commonwealth v. Hunt
- B. Muller v. Oregon
- C. Brown v. Board of Education
- D. Engel v. Vitale
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: B
Muller v. Oregon upheld the state's ability to regulate working hours for women, emphasizing the government's role in protecting public welfare. This precedent supports Kansas's law limiting teenage work hours on farms, as it aligns with the principle of safeguarding minors' health and well-being. Commonwealth v. Hunt dealt with labor unions and the right to organize, which does not pertain to youth labor regulations. Brown v. Board of Education focused on desegregation in schools, irrelevant to labor laws. Engel v. Vitale addressed school prayer, having no connection to employment issues. Thus, only Muller v. Oregon directly supports the rationale for Kansas's law.
Muller v. Oregon upheld the state's ability to regulate working hours for women, emphasizing the government's role in protecting public welfare. This precedent supports Kansas's law limiting teenage work hours on farms, as it aligns with the principle of safeguarding minors' health and well-being. Commonwealth v. Hunt dealt with labor unions and the right to organize, which does not pertain to youth labor regulations. Brown v. Board of Education focused on desegregation in schools, irrelevant to labor laws. Engel v. Vitale addressed school prayer, having no connection to employment issues. Thus, only Muller v. Oregon directly supports the rationale for Kansas's law.
In Grand Coast, what is the opportunity cost of one unit of fish?
- A. ½ unit of timber
- B. 5 units of timber
- C. 2 units of fish
- D. 8 units of fish
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: A
Opportunity cost refers to the value of the next best alternative that is forgone when making a choice. In Grand Coast, if one unit of fish is produced, the opportunity cost is the amount of timber that could have been produced instead. Option A, ½ unit of timber, accurately reflects this trade-off, indicating that for each unit of fish, only half a unit of timber is sacrificed. Option B, 5 units of timber, overestimates the sacrifice, suggesting a much higher cost than what is actually incurred. Option C, 2 units of fish, misinterprets the concept, as it implies a cost in the same product rather than in timber. Option D, 8 units of fish, also incorrectly suggests a loss of the same good, failing to recognize the opportunity cost in terms of timber.
Opportunity cost refers to the value of the next best alternative that is forgone when making a choice. In Grand Coast, if one unit of fish is produced, the opportunity cost is the amount of timber that could have been produced instead. Option A, ½ unit of timber, accurately reflects this trade-off, indicating that for each unit of fish, only half a unit of timber is sacrificed. Option B, 5 units of timber, overestimates the sacrifice, suggesting a much higher cost than what is actually incurred. Option C, 2 units of fish, misinterprets the concept, as it implies a cost in the same product rather than in timber. Option D, 8 units of fish, also incorrectly suggests a loss of the same good, failing to recognize the opportunity cost in terms of timber.
Which point on this PPF graph represents a currently unobtainable output level for this economy?
- A. V
- B. X
- C. Y
- D. Z
Correct Answer & Rationale
Correct Answer: D
Point D represents a currently unobtainable output level for this economy because it lies outside the production possibilities frontier (PPF). The PPF illustrates the maximum efficient production of two goods, given the available resources and technology. Point A (V), Point B (X), and Point C (Y) are all located on or within the PPF, indicating feasible production levels that the economy can achieve. In contrast, Point D (Z) exceeds these capabilities, signifying an output level that cannot be realized with the current resources and technology. Thus, only Point D is unattainable.
Point D represents a currently unobtainable output level for this economy because it lies outside the production possibilities frontier (PPF). The PPF illustrates the maximum efficient production of two goods, given the available resources and technology. Point A (V), Point B (X), and Point C (Y) are all located on or within the PPF, indicating feasible production levels that the economy can achieve. In contrast, Point D (Z) exceeds these capabilities, signifying an output level that cannot be realized with the current resources and technology. Thus, only Point D is unattainable.