Meat production is.
The largest contributor to the ecological footprint of most individuals in affluent nations is the consumption of goods and services, particularly those that require extensive resources and energy for their production and transportation. This includes items like clothing, electronics, and food that may have a high carbon footprint or are associated with deforestation, water depletion, and pollution. Additionally, transportation and energy use in affluent lifestyles also contribute significantly to their ecological footprint.
The Brandt Line was a theoretical demarcation line proposed by ex-German Chancellor Willy Brandt and others in the 1970's and 1980's. It was designed to show how Southern Hemisphere economies were less affluent overall than those in the Northern Hemisphere.The Brandt Line is also known as the "North-South divide".
The conurbation of London is the urban region which includes adjacent towns and suburbs - that makes up the Metropolitan County of Greater London. This would suggest that it is "southern England," because it is centered in the London metropolitan area and it is the UK's most affluent subregion.The regions are as follows;A.Southern EnglandB. Northern EnglandC. ScotlandD. WalesE. London lies on the border between the North and the Southsouthern England
All of Mitt and Ann Romney's five boys attended the Belmont Hill School for Boys in Belmont, Massachusetts. It is a private all-boys non-sectarian school in the affluent Belmont Hill neighborhood of Belmont, Massachusetts. It is just a short walk from the home on Marsh Street in Belmont Hill where Mitt and Ann raised their children and resided until 2009. Taggart Romney, Mitt and Ann's oldest son, now lives on Marsh Street in Belmont Hill.
toilet bowls currency faucets light switch door knob computer keyboard shopping cart remote control kitchen sponge cheating racism indifference of the most affluent about mass poverty child labor sexual abuse on adults sexual abuse on children passing nuclear waste onto future generations for 20,000 years cutting down the rainforests to make room for cornfields to feed our cattle turning a god-given beautiful planet into a dump completing a college education and then deciding to make or sell land-mines turning a blind eye when your fellow-men or women are oppressed indulging in some of the above in the name of someone you call God THERE JUST CAN'T BE A TOP TEN WHEN THE LIST IS SO LONG...
Respectfully, it is a foolish discussion to have.. There are really only 2 personal tax rates right now - with the second (higher) one effective only on that part of ones income above the top amount of the first one....so most people really only deal with one right now anyway! An certainly 2 doesn't seem excessive or overly complex.The issue of the question, relates especially to tax code complexity and fairness, and really must address more of what comprises taxable income and deductions, not the rate applied. What I'm saying is it is generally agreed, fairness or Pros and Cons as such, are more determined by what you pay tax on than what the rate is.Consider...mathamatically, if we have 2 rates now and went to one - all other things remaining the same (how much $ the Govt needs to raise by tax) - the rate for the higher rate would be lowered and the lower rate raised...can't happen any other way...unless you change what is taxed, in which case, likely those generally needy...who actually pay little or nothing now, will have to pay the flat rate on much more "taxable" income. Because of many things, the affluent really already have most all new "marginal" income as taxable income at the higher rate now!
I think it is RICH.
the grand house was owned by an affluent gentleman the grand house was owned by an affluent gentleman
The part of speech that "the affluent" would be would be dependent on the usage.If it were a subject, "The affluent" would be doing something: The affluent are cheating their workers.If it were a direct object: The affluent would be having something done to them: The affluent were saddled with another tax.If it were an indirect object "The affluent would have been the recipient of something: A tax break was given to the affluent.The affluent could posses something and become the possessive in a sentence: The money that President Obama wants to redistribute from the taxes of the affluent is insufficient to satisfy the deficit.If you want to go all Latin on the issue, you could implicate "The affluent" in the sentence and come up with: By the means of the affluent, the Democrat party realized that President Obama is a one term president.
Affluent people are sometimes rude and spoiled.
Reported acts of violence are increasing in the affluent parts of the city. Some of the more affluent politicians voted against the initiative.
more affluent ones
Most of the students at Ivy League schools are from wealthy, affluent families.
His affluent neighbor actually owned five expensive cars, and seldom used four of them. The burglaries occurred in an affluent neighborhood west of the city.
Affluent is an adjective, so does not have a plural form. The noun, both singular and plural, is affluence.
A - for affluent
The poor couple worked hard, saved and invested their money wisely and became very affluent. Starting at the bottom, Homer built a very affluent company.
A synonym for affluent as an adjective that stars with R is rich, as a noun is rivulet.