WHY IS IT THA THESE QUETSIONS SEEM CHALLENGING;KINDLY ANSWER

As reported in the bookHeight, Health, and History, the change in average adult male height in the United States over the last three hundred years did not follow a simple trend. From around 1710 to 1830, the average height of adult American men remained effectively at around 173 cm. Over the next sixty years (1830 to 1890), the average height actually dropped from 173 cm down to 169 cm. Then over the next forty years (1890 to 1930), the average height climbed back up, reaching the value of 176 cm. The average height of adult American men today is still 176 cm.

We can take a few things away from these numbers. First, there has not been a smooth trend in average height change over the last 300 years in the United States. For most of this period, the average height has either stagnated or dropped. Only during the brief forty years leading up to the Great Depression did the average height see rapid increase. Therefore, in the United States, an increase in average height is neither steady nor inevitable.

Secondly, Americans today are not really that much taller than Americans during the 1700's. Three centimeters is less than the diameter of a golf ball. Therefore, a house from the 1700's that has its ceiling three feet too low according to today's standards is not that way because people were three feet shorter back then. Such a house must have been built that way for another reason (perhaps the inhabitants were too poor to afford the extra material for high ceilings).

The last point we can draw from the U.S. height data is that the variation in height among a population at any point in time is much greater than the variation of the average height itself over time. Gather a group of adult males and line them up by height. You will find a variation in height between the shortest one and the tallest of about 20 or 30 cm (if your group is a reasonable statistical sample). Compare this to the 3 cm that Americans have on average gained over the last three hundred years. Simply put, the difference in height between you and your neighbor will likely be several times greater than the difference in height between the average of your neighborhood now and that of your neighborhood three hundred years ago (assuming, for the sake of the argument, that you are all adult American males). In other words, the variation in height from family to family right now is far larger than the variation in average height from century to century. If you time-traveled to the 1700's, you would not notice that the people are shorter on average.

Now, let's look at Europe. Unlike in the United States, the numbers reported in the bookHeight, Health, and Historyindicate that in European nations, the average male height has been changing more steadily. In the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway, the average male height upon conscription has steadily increased from about 167 cm in 1870 to about 181 cm today. Similarly, in Italy and France, the average male height upon conscription has steadily increased from about 164 cm in 1870 to about 176 cm today. Thus, these European nations have gained about 13 cm in average height over the last 150 years. To give you an idea of what this means, 13 cm is about the width of two tennis balls. As we can see, these European nations did indeed see a more significant gain in height over the last 150 yearsmuch larger than that seen in the U.S.but it is still no where near the three foot height gain that some people may have in mind.

QUETSIONS

1.business law have been known to incorporate all the concepts of corporate law due to its diversity; explain how chartered companies that lack the statutory company requirement of the registration

2.according to business law; how can a company with a limited liability be liable to the rare cases of the unlimited liability?

3.discuss the proportionate compositionof the ownership parameters for the government and non-governmental companies

4.wehat are the unique but compromising features for the conclusively of the national and foreign regarding the cumbersome businesslaws? analyze too how to chip in the phenomenon of the multinational companies

5.in terms of the control basis applied in business law; analyze how to link the holding and the subsidiary companies towards a common goal of the share capital broadness

6.what was the relevance of the Lord Justice Lindley definition of the company regarding the dynamicsof the common stock and the member share contribution capital?

7.how did the Justice Marshall contradict such above description and what milestone parameters did he add on top which are in accordance with the modern business law concepts?

8.how can the features of the business law encompassing the registration of a company and the voluntary association work together to influence the legal position and the sanity of a company?

9.according the historical case of Salomon v. Salomon & Co. Ltd., regarding company legal personality, how can debenture be part of the unique feature of the business law to consider in the transfer of ownership? Demonstrate

10-.in the context of business law; what does contractual capacities have to with the management of the company and the shareholders?