Please rephrase - the question is unclear.

yes

In Australia the water and vines go to the lest. so basically the water does down the drain to the left. also the vines go to the lest too.

the effects of river pollution;

many water borne diseases can cause due to it

it will become a home for mosquitoes and other insects.

diseases like dengue and malaria will spread

people would be drinking contaminated water

germs would spread

Yes, there is air pollution in panama big time! There is construction going on at almost every corner in the city, which greatly adds to the dirty air and particles of dust etc. Allergies are high. Respiratory problems are very frequent especially among children. The cars and diesel fuel create tremendous air pollution. We do have a constant breeze from the ocean which helps to clear the air a bit but on a stagnant hot humid day, the air pollution together with the heat can be very overwhelming. It is time to clean up Panama's air!

jal he to kal he

jal nahi to kuch nahi

Ped lagao, desh bachao. Paryavaran sanrakshan, jeevan hoga kal

jal hai to kal hai ped lagao jeevan bachao ped ki raksha desh ki raksha jal se hi kal aur nahi aate..

Apne aspas swachhata barte hara bharat swachh bharat

Jan-jan se yeh kehna hai,vriksha dhara ka gehna hai.

Shuddha na ho agar vatavaran,manavta ka hoga maran.

Jal hai to kal hai.

Kate vriksha,ujadate van,de rahe pralay ko amantran.

ped lagao,jeevan bachao es dhara ko swrg banao

Evaporating the water salt is obtained; but rivers concentrations of sodium chloride are low and the method is not economical.

Well ... a positive effect of the confederation of Canada, would be the avoidance of annexation, (look it up in the dictionary) from the U.S. Another one would be the fact that they could control their own taxes, education, and military. Having one central government would allow the government to pass bills more easily, because before, there was a double majority, which meant, they both agreed, or nothing got passed(Canada West and Canada East always disagreed). One bad thing i can think of, is that the French would be somewhat assimilated into the English way. They felt like they were losing their culture by giving into a central government, that's why they wanted more provincial rights. Military control could also be kind of bad for the country. Before Canada became a country, Britain took control of all military aspects of Canada, which meant they also paid for everything. Taking control of the military also means you take control of the bill. Hope i could help.

A disadvantage of competition can be the loss of local jobs, particularly in the manufacturing industry. As competition pushes prices of goods down firms may move offshore in search of cheaper labour in order to stay competitive. This can lead to some firms exploiting people in less developed countries and in extreme cases even child and or slave labour.

Some industries do not lend themselves to competition. The main example commonly used is the supply of water to residential homes. It does not make sense to have multiple sets of pipes running to each home. In an industry such as this it is cheaper to have a monopoly firm, regulated by government to insure fair price and a minimal level of service.

If markets functioned perfectly, there wouldn't be any need for regulation. There would be enough buyers and sellers in any market that none of them would have market power, there wouldn't be any externalities, and everyone would have perfect information, and as a result, everyone's incentives would cause their local choices to guide the market to the most efficient social outcome. In practice, lots of markets are dominated by one or a small number of firms, there are lots of negative and positive externalities, and consumers aren't always well-informed. The idea behind regulation (in theory at least) is that in some markets, under regulation the market will come closer to the outcome of a perfect market than if it were left unregulated - prices will be lower, avoiding deadweight loss, firms will invest heavily into research and development rather than building up piles of cash or paying dividends, etc. The case against regulation: Regulation is created and enforced by the government, which often isn't actually incentivized to create the most efficient outcome. Governments are driven by politics and are heavily influenced by lobbying, the media, and irrational consumer sentiment. And especially with the rate of change of technology, the government often lags behind the development of new markets and important changes in old markets. Even if the government was good at regulating, there are some more reasons why regulation might not be necessary in cases where one firm is dominating a market: A firm that appears to be a monopoly based on a narrow definition of the market might actually compete in a more general market, providing an incentive for them to price competitively and invest in future developments (airlines compete against other forms of transportation, Facebook competes against email, etc). Also, the threat of entry by a new competitor can motivate a firm to keep prices down and keep research going, even when that competitor doesn't exist yet. Foreign competitors often can't be regulated by a government very well, and so regulating domestic firms can put them at a disadvantage in the global economy. Even when a firm is monopolizing a market and can charge prices far above what they'd be in a competitive environment, there's an argument that this serves as a reward and can incentivize a large amount of research and development when the market is new. For example, if a new market starts out competitive, and founders and investors behind many of the companies know that the value of winning the market is very high (because they will be able to charge monopoly rents), in theory, that will cause much of the surplus that is expected to be generated later to get invested immediately. This causes technological development to happen much faster than it otherwise would, and the monopoly profits go toward "paying back" this investment. Under this view, anti-trust regulation discourages investment and slows down progress in new markets. For example, Facebook stock prices are lower than they otherwise would be because of the expectation of future regulation - this means the company has less money to invest in development than it otherwise would.

How there is head and tail for a coin, there is both positive and negative impact of western culture on India and especially on Indian youth,

In past in India men were our traditional dresses, but now it is entirely changed, now the Indian youth moving with jeans, t-shirts, minis, micros, etc., here we can proud of that western culture, it bringing us with the fast moving world.

But when we consider the pubs, it is the thing to be strictly punished. In pubs both men and women are in drastic stage, by taking drugs, it should be punished. And we need to felt sorry for that.

And there r many things to be taken from the western culture.

Effect Of Western Culture On Indian Youth

Well World is changing, because of lot of developments in various sectors like IT, MANUFACTURING, Revolution of E COMMERCE and many more ... have brought the ties between various nations/ people and their cultures to get mixed with each other. WELL I WOULD TAKE A BIASED OPINION IN THIS.

Lets take example of USA. Well Indians are crazy of adopting Western Culture LIKE DRESS CODE, MUSIC, HABITS, IMPORTING FOREIGN GOODS. What not we feel so attracted to all those. But by adopting we dint loose our traditions and culture; we tend to blend both of them.

It all depends on person likes and dislikes, how he /she will behave according to situations. As our friend PAVANI has mentioned like PUBS are to be strictly banned. Well that cant is possible realistically. If an individual decides what is good/bad for them every person can be in control ...rite

I finally stress points like No matter people adopt what ever the culture ... They shud be in the limits and act rationally according to the situations. We jus cant stop/Ban things by considering it to be western /eastern. We need to analyze what benefits we get and try to choose.options. Since what all we want is PROGRESS/DEVELOPMENT ultimately to our nation. So IT'S EVERY PERSONS RESPONSIBILY TO CONTRIBUTE HIS/HER PART TO IT.

I guess always the other side of the grass is green. We sitting here always crave and imitate western people and their culture. While they are now going craze over yoga, Ayurveda and lot of other ancient traditions. What a shame we don't have patents for yoga.

Coming back to your question, yes we are in the midst of such a western craze that we have almost forgotten what our roots are. We are running a'moke over this western culture, that over the next couple of generations, we would have become truly westernised.

The thing is the you wouldn't want to avoid a country u Neva know maybe it would help your country for the technology and the standards of the country so that's thenreason is u can have enemies any where you camt always trust people

When a body of water loses volume, the pollution inside the water remains relatively constant and as a result the water that would normally dilute the pollutants becomes magnified as a result.

Burning one 20lb tire releases 60lbs of CO2.

From the pipes and plumbing coming into your home. :)