Discussion questions: 1. To what degree (how much) is world population growth a problem for the future?

2. When you have a family, will you choose (or should you be limited) to have fewer children due to concerns about world population growth?

Can someone help me out with these two discussion questions and if it could be one sentence each it doesn’t really matter. I’d really appreciate it I have so many things please and thank you

1. It's a problem because we will start to run out of jobs to do, and houses to live in.

2. You should be limited because over population could be a disaster.

Explanation:

it is a problem so the answer is problem

using the map image above, answer a, b, and c. a. briefly explain the historical context of this map image.b. briefly explain one economic or social development in the period 1607–1754 that could be used to explain what the cartographer (mapmaker) shows in the map image. c. briefly explain one social development in the period 1607–1754 that could be used to explain the distinctions shown in the map image.your responses: a.during this time period the colonies had recently been formed by the british. the colonies were grouped into three sections based on common beliefs, lively hood, and how they interacted. the new england colonies had passed the mayflower compact and they focused on trade, shipbuilding, and fishing. the middle colonies had purchased land from the native americans and dealt mostly with the export of wheat, banking, and shipping.

hope this

1- in bradbury's  fahrenheit 451, all books are banned and burned upon discovery. in the nazi germany, books considered to be subversive to the regime would be burned to keep the population from generating ideologies that could challenge nazism.

2- was bradbury correct in his literal interpretation of  “where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people.”? in some way, yes. when knowledge is not only limited, but also controlled, the people tied to it are led to their demise. just like in the novel, people in nazi germany who owned  subversive books were punished not only by the burning of their property, but also by the discrimination that followed after such a public form of consequence. if a person was seen being confiscated  subversive  books, they may be considered as an ally to the jews, which meant pretty much the same as being the enemy back then. because of the extreme exclusion and suffering that followed this punishment, it's almost like dying a slow death.

in this way, the phrase  “where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people.” is both literal and figurative.

explanation:

mark brainliest and have a great day!