In recent years, rules have tightened such that those who work for the U. S. government in trade negotiations are now restricted from working for lobbyists for foreign firms. Take the stance of either for or against that statement. Provide justification for your stance.

For this statement.

Explanation:

People will generally offer their loyalties to those who pay them the highest or who pay them at all and companies will typically be loyal to their country of origin.

What this means is that trade negotiators who work for lobbyists of foreign firms will typically want to advance the interests of the foreign firms when negotiating trade deals for the U.S. government.

This presents a problem because the foreign companies might want to negotiate a deal that favors their own countries over the United States so if trade negotiators that are on their side are the ones negotiating for the United States, the U.S. might not get a good enough deal.

Imagine for instance, a person negotiating a trade deal for the U.S. with China but the person works for lobbyists of Huawei. It is reasonable to assume that the person would want to advance the interests of China on behalf of Huawei. Restricting such a person from negotiating for the U.S. reduces such a possibility.

answer; ///blank(1) 75%; blank(2) 40%;

consumer credit. an advantage is that it allows consumers to afford expensive goods and services now, increasing their standard of living. however, a disadvantage is that it creates a trap for debt, if people do not have self control, they may see themselves filing personal bankruptcy.