Feudalism was a national economic organizational system. Anyone who lived in a feudal society contributed to feudalism in the same way that anyone who lives in a capitalist society contributes to capitalism.

l0l, 5crub. 1v1 m3 u n00b. im 11 thumbz up if u agr33. i'll wr3ck u 4ny d4y

In the early 1800s, the North was all about industry, while the South was thriving agriculturally. This made the North antislvery and the South proslavery... These different views would lead to tension which would cause many problems, the most important being The Civil War (1861-1865)... Hope this helps! (:

1. what to produce,

2. how to pruduce, and

3. for whom to produce.

the economy is where goods and produce and be distributed, traded/sold, and consumed. The purpose is so everyone can get what they need-ex) farmer sells crops and goes buy paint for his barn...farmer grows crops and only crops, and the paint maker makes only paint, and basically they trade so they both get what they need.

In a capitalist system, the means of production are privately owned and operated. Over time, this results in resources being controlled mainly by large corporations and conglomerates. Capitalism is driven by profit motive, so in a capitalist system, the allocation of resources is decided based on making money according to supply and demand.

In a socialist based economy, the means of production are publicly-owned, meaning resources would be allocated according to the needs of the people by a governing body.

According to mercantilism, the metropole would require the colonies to engage in two general behaviors: (1) The colonies were locked into exclusive trade between themselves and metropole and were not allowed to trade with any other nation or colony. (2) No manufactures or complex goods could be made in the colonial territory. As a result the colonies would provide wealth to the metropole by trading their natural resources for less than they would be worth and by buying manufactures for much more money.

Direct exchange requires that you have something that somebody else wants, and that THAT PERSON have something else that YOU want - and that you both agree that what you have is worth what he has.

A bartering system requires that you have something that somebody else wants, and that somebody else has something that YOU want - and that you can trade one thing for another, even if you need to get three or more people who all swap things. It works pretty well in a small farming community, for example; you have grain from your crops, and you trade your grain for eggs from your neighbor's chickens. Then you can bake a cake and give it to the blacksmith, in exchange for shoeing your horse.

Outside of a small community, barter breaks down; you need something that nobody in town can make or grow. Traveling merchants may provide luxuries like jewelry in exchange for food and lodging, but what if the merchant has just left - or your crops aren't ready to harvest? Every larger society has developed a medium of exchange in which everybody agrees that this object represents a value that can be traded, and to an extent, they all agree on what is worth what. Here in Earth, and in most places, the medium of exchange, the "object of value", is gold and silver. When stamped into disks of standardized size and weight, and marked with the maker's seals, it becomes a "coin", and forms the basis for money. But "money" is only of value for what you can DO with it. You can't eat gold; you can only trade it for something else. It's a marker for keeping score.

Today, the markers for keeping score are bits, ones and zeroes in a computer system.

balance of trade

"Free market" economy

Now is a free market system.

Semi Capitalist

Feudalism was its own economic system and was relatively unique in creating a rigid system based on local barons who would control tracts of land worked by peasants and patrolled by knights. What the peasants grew would be tithed and these tithes would serve to feed the barons and knights as well as exchange for goods produced in other baronies.

free-market economy

Marx criticized the capitalist economic system, because it resulted in the creation of two classes of people, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat with the bourgeoisie being able to oppress and exploit the proletariat. He also felt it had three inherent contradictions that would lead to its demise. First, the system aimed at production for personal gain rather than the betterment of society in general. Second, improvements in industry turned the labor force into a social force since the individual artisans of the past were being replaced by common laborers who would eventually be motivated to unite at some time. Third, while there is order and planning within individual factories, there is competition outside of them. This results in a failure to match production with demand.

No. Absolutely not. There are countless stories of Americans who started with nothing, coming from poor backgrounds, pursuing their dreams and making it big. Not too much of that going on in communism. Since the communist model discourages (even bans) private property, how can they possibly claim to allow significantly more individual freedom? Communism discourages individual freedom, and prefers a collective "hive" mentality in which its subjects are kept under strict control and kept from attaining wealth.

Enlightened despots attempted to bring about reforms to their social and government systems during their rules.

World War II is actually what completely brought the United States out of the Great Depression. In the beginning of the war, similar to what we did in WWI, we sold weapons, ammunition, and other war materials to the Allies in Europe. This greatly helped out economy and brought us out of the Depression.

it is cotton kingdom (a+answer)

Following the end of WWII, America shifted it's focus to the growing concern over Communist aggression, as well as the task of rebuilding a wartorn Europe. The Marshall Plan was instituted and, before we knew it, we were stuck in the Cold War.