GED Social Studies Practice Test 3

CBP Trade Statistics*

* Trade Remedy Duties Assessed = trade remedy duties due on imported goods.

Which of the following statements is most accurate regarding the relationship between the Total Import Value for Goods and the Total Duty, Taxes, and Fees Collected?

Payments behavior

Figure 21 shows how different types of accounts were paid between the years 2008 and 2014. As shown, “exact minimum payer,” “near minimum payer,” and “full payer” accounts exhibit high levels of persistent behavior over time.

For example nearly 80% of the payments made by “exact minimum payer” accounts are exactly at the required minimum. Similarly, some 90% of payments made by “full payer” accounts are full payments.

Which of the following statements is true regarding the information above?

GEORGE H. W. BUSH, “SPEECH AT PENN STATE UNIVERSITY” (23 SEPTEMBER 1992)

[13] This agenda that I have out there–this detailed agenda contains 13 actions, specific actions that I will pursue in the first–the first year of my second term–and I will fight for them harder than the Nittany Lions–fourth quarter, fourth down–goal to go. And that’s tough. That’s tough. (Applause) And so I’m asking the people for nothing more–nothing less–than a mandate to move this country forward. And I will work with the hundred and some newly elected Members of Congress who will listen to the people to move this country forward. (Applause)

[14] And yes, I want a debate–I want a debate over issues and an argument over ideas. And I will stand on my record–and I won’t let that Arkansas Governor run away from his record, either. (Applause) You know, I think the American people have a right to know what they’re buying into. Because remember, if you buy what candidate Clinton is selling–there’s no refund. There’s no rebate. Actually, it’s more like a permanent payment plan. And I don’t think we need that for the United States of America.

[15] On one issue–and I think it’s the fundamental issue in this campaign–my opponent and I have just agreed to disagree. It’s a question of how our economy grows–and how our country works.

[16] And it’s kind of like jeopardy–it all comes down to how you ask the question. And my opponent asks what makes the economy grow. And his answer–and look at his program–is government planners and projects and programs. And I ask who makes this country go. And my answer is you, the individual working men and women, building and buying the freedom of a market.

[17] My opponent believes that the Government will–quote–and here are his words “invest” unquote–your money smarter than you can. And I don’t see it that way. I say the smart money is on the smart people, like standing right out here in this beautiful day in Pennsylvania. (Applause)

[18] You know, it’s crazy. Some of y’all are studying history, and it’s a crazy thing. At the very moment when Russia and Eastern Europe and the whole world is turning our way, why would we want to go back their way? (Applause) And all of a sudden, all around the world, people are turning to free markets, and to free trade, and to freedom. And now that the world is finally catching on, what are we supposed to say–“just kidding,” and start their way? No.

Which of the following statements best reflects George H. W. Bush’s perspective on the role of government in economic growth, as conveyed in the provided speech at Penn State University?

Frank Bruni, a contributing Opinion writer, hosted a written online conversation with Mike Murphy, a co-director of the Center for the Political Future at the University of Southern California, a former Republican strategist for John McCain and others and a host of the podcast “Hacks on Tap” and Kristen Soltis Anderson, a Republican pollster and a moderator of the Times Opinion focus group series, to discuss their expectations for the Iowa caucus. They also banter about the road ahead for the G.O.P. primary and what the general election might look like after the primary.

Frank Bruni: Mike, Kristen, happy Iowa caucuses. I’m sitting here at my kitchen table in a parka and earmuffs, in honor of the freezing temperatures that caucus goers are expected to brave. And I thank you for joining me.

Have any of the developments of recent days (Donald Trump’s appearance in two different courtrooms, Chris Christie’s exit from the race, the Nikki Haley-Ron DeSantis debate, some other twist) potentially altered the trajectory of the race or set up caucus results that might surprise us?

Kristen Soltis Anderson: I doubt that the events of the last few days have done much. This is still Trump’s caucus to lose.

Bruni: But will he win as big as some people believe? And if he does stage a blowout, is there only one, or more than one, ticket out of Iowa?

Soltis Anderson: I wouldn’t be surprised to see Trump get a majority of votes. And I think there’s only one ticket out of Iowa. DeSantis would need to dominate handily, winning or coming near Trump’s share, to have a prayer of gaining the momentum he’d need to thrive in New Hampshire or South Carolina. Without that, DeSantis has nowhere to go besides looking ahead to 2028.

Mike Murphy: Iowa is the opening act for the Big Show in New Hampshire and South Carolina. Two story lines will count out of Iowa: Who is the biggest winner, and who is the biggest loser, in the expectations game, the noise of which will have an effect on New Hampshire.

Haley has been inching up in Iowa for several weeks, and I think she will beat DeSantis for second. Then she’ll get the “winner” medal and move on. Nothing works as well as beating somebody you were behind. If Trump does get a blowout win — which I doubt, I think he’ll be under 45 percent and underperform — it’ll still be all about New Hampshire and then South Carolina.

Which of the following statements best captures Mike Murphy’s perspective on the significance of the Iowa caucus and its impact on the Republican primary race, as discussed in the given passage?

Treaty of Versailles

The Treaty of Versailles, signed in 1919 at the Palace of Versailles in Paris at the end of World War I, codified peace terms between Germany and the victorious Allies. The Treaty of Versailles held Germany responsible for starting the war and imposed harsh penalties on the Germans, including loss of territory, massive reparations payments and demilitarization. Far from the “peace without victory” that U.S. President Woodrow Wilson had outlined in his famous Fourteen Points in early 1918, the Treaty of Versailles humiliated Germany while failing to resolve the underlying issues that had led to war in the first place. Economic distress and seething resentment of the treaty within Germany helped fuel the rise of Adolf Hitler and his Nazi Party, as well as World War II.

The Fourteen Points 

In a speech to Congress in January 1918, Wilson laid out his idealistic vision for the world after World War I, which was at the time sometimes referred to as “the war to end all wars.”

In addition to specific territorial settlements based on an Allied victory, Wilson’s so-called Fourteen Points emphasized the need for national self-determination for Europe’s different ethnic populations.

Wilson also proposed the founding of a “general association of nations” that would mediate international disputes and foster cooperation between different nations in the hopes of preventing war on such a large scale in the future. This organization eventually became known as the League of Nations.

Paris Peace Conference

The Paris Peace Conference opened on January 18, 1919, a date that was significant in that it marked the anniversary of the coronation of German Emperor Wilhelm I, which took place in the Palace of Versailles at the end of the Franco-Prussian War in 1871.

Prussian victory in that conflict had resulted in Germany’s unification and its seizure of Alsace and Lorraine provinces from France. In 1919, France and its prime minister, Georges Clemenceau, had not forgotten the humiliating loss and intended to avenge it in the new peace agreement.

According to the passage, what were the key shortcomings of the Treaty of Versailles in addressing the aftermath of World War I?

1930s Isolationism

“Leave me alone,” seemed to be America’s attitude toward the rest of the world in the 1930s.

At the dawn of the ’30s, foreign policy was not a burning issue for the average American. The stock market had just crashed and each passing month brought greater and greater hardships. American involvement with Europe had brought war in 1917 and unpaid debt throughout the 1920s. Having grown weary with the course of world events, citizens were convinced the most important issues to be tackled were domestic. Foreign policy leaders of the 1930s once again led the country down its well-traveled path of isolationism.

The Hoover Administration set the tone for an isolationist foreign policy with the Hawley-Smoot Tariff. Trade often dominated international relations and the protective wall of the tariff left little to discuss. The Far East became an area of concern when the Japanese government ordered an attack on CHINESE MANCHURIA. This invasion was a clear violation of the NINE POWER TREATY, which prohibited nations from carving a special sphere of influence in China.

The Hoover Administration knew that any harsh action against JAPAN would be unpopular in the midst of the Great Depression. The official American response was the STIMSON DOCTRINE, which refused to recognize any territory illegally occupied by Japan. As meek as this may sound, it went further toward condemning Japan than the government of Great Britain was willing to do.

One possibility for international economic cooperation failed at the LONDON CONFERENCE OF 1933. Leaders of European nations hoped to increase trade and stabilize international currencies. Roosevelt sent a “BOMBSHELL MESSAGE” to the conference refusing any attempt to tie the American dollar to a gold standard. The conference dissolved with European delegates miffed at the lack of cooperation by the United States.

Which of the following statements about America’s foreign policy in the 1930s is an opinion rather than a fact?

Various researchers made the claims listed below. Which of the following statements (based on the provided graph), is a fact rather than an opinion.

Jan 30, 1968 CE: Tet Offensive

On January 30, 1968, communist-affiliated troops from North Vietnam and the Viet Cong (a distinct political organization) launched what became known as the Tet Offensive against South Vietnam and its American allies. The Tet Offensive was one of the largest military operations of the Vietnam War, and became a key turning point in the conflict.

The Tet Offensive was a surprise series of attacks launched during Tet, the Vietnamese New Year festival. Many South Vietnamese troops were on holiday when the attacks began, and the military was caught off guard. The campaign initially targeted more than 100 cities and towns, including the strategic southern capital of Saigon, now named Ho Chi Minh City.

The Tet Offensive was a catastrophic military failure for the communists. Historians estimate as many as 50,000 communist troops died in the effort to gain control of the southern part of the country. The South Vietnamese and American losses totaled a fraction of that number.

Although a military loss, the Tet Offensive was a stunning propaganda victory for the communists. In fact, it is often credited with turning the war in their favor. The South Vietnamese began to lose influence as Viet Cong guerrillas infiltrated rural areas formerly held by the South Vietnamese government. The offensive frayed the relationship between the South Vietnamese and the United States.

The consequences of the Tet Offensive extended to the United States. Many Americans began to question military and political leaders who assured them the Vietnam War would be won soon. In the wake of the Tet Offensive, popular U.S. journalist Walter Cronkite said, “We are mired in a stalemate [and] the only rational way out, then, will be to negotiate, not as victors, but as an honorable people who lived up to their pledge to defend democracy and did the best they could.”

Which of the following statements from the given text most prominently demonstrates a form of bias and propaganda?

The Battle of Gettysburg, fought from July 1 to July 3, 1863, in and around the town of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, was a turning point in the American Civil War. This battle, involving the largest number of casualties of the entire war, resulted in a Union victory that halted Confederate General Robert E. Lee’s invasion of the North. The aftermath of the battle witnessed President Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, a speech that redefined the purpose of the war and highlighted the principles of liberty and equality.

The strategic significance of the Battle of Gettysburg was immense, as it shifted the tide of the war in favor of the Union and marked the decline of Confederate military fortunes. The battle and the ensuing address played a pivotal role in shaping the national consciousness, emphasizing the United States’ commitment to a new birth of freedom and the preservation of the Union.

Based on the passage, which state in the US was the site of a crucial Civil War battle that resulted in a Union victory and halted Confederate advancement, later followed by President Lincoln’s speech that redefined the war’s purpose?

The Civil Rights Act of 1964

The NAACP’s legal strategy against segregated education culminated in the 1954 Supreme Court’s landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision. African Americans gained the formal, if not the practical, right to study alongside their white peers in primary and secondary schools. The decision fueled an intransigent, violent resistance during which Southern states used a variety of tactics to evade the law.

In the summer of 1955, a surge of anti-black violence included the kidnapping and brutal murder of fourteen-year-old Emmett Till, a crime that provoked widespread and assertive protests from black and white Americans. By December 1955, the Montgomery, Alabama, bus boycott led by Martin Luther King, Jr., began a protracted campaign of nonviolent civil disobedience to protest segregation that attracted national and international attention.

During 1956, a group of Southern senators and congressmen signed the “Southern Manifesto,” vowing resistance to racial integration by all “lawful means.” Resistance heightened in 1957–1958 during the crisis over integration at Little Rock’s Central High School. At the same time, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights led a successful drive for passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and continued to press for even stronger legislation. NAACP Youth Council chapters staged sit-ins at whites-only lunch counters, sparking a movement against segregation in public accommodations throughout the South in 1960. Nonviolent direct action increased during the presidency of John F. Kennedy, beginning with the 1961 Freedom Rides.

Hundreds of demonstrations erupted in cities and towns across the nation. National and international media coverage of the use of fire hoses and attack dogs against child protesters precipitated a crisis in the Kennedy administration, which it could not ignore. The bombings and riots in Birmingham, Alabama, on May 11, 1963, compelled Kennedy to call in federal troops.

On June 19, 1963, the president sent a comprehensive civil rights bill to Congress. The March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom on August 28 roused public support for the pending bill. After the president’s assassination on November 22, the fate of Kennedy’s bill was in the hands of his vice president and successor, Lyndon b. Johnson, and the United States Congress.

What event led to President Kennedy sending a comprehensive civil rights bill to Congress in June 1963?

THE GREAT DEPRESSION

In the early 1920s, farmers saw several opportunities for increasing their production. New technology and crop varieties were reducing the time and costs-per-acre of farming, which provided a great incentive for agricultural expansion. This expansion was also necessary to pay for expensive, newly developed equipment (such as listers and plows) that was often purchased on credit, and to offset low crop prices after World War I. When the national economy went into decline in the late 1920s because of the Great Depression, agriculture was even more adversely affected. In addition, a record wheat crop in 1931 sent crop prices even lower. These lower prices meant that farmers needed to cultivate more acreage, including poorer farmlands, or change crop varieties to produce enough grain to meet their required equipment and farm payments.

When drought began in the early 1930s, it worsened these poor economic conditions. The depression and drought hit farmers on the Great Plains the hardest. Many of these farmers were forced to seek government assistance. A 1937 bulletin by the Works Progress Administration reported that 21% of all rural families in the Great Plains were receiving federal emergency relief (Link et al., 1937). However, even with government help, many farmers could not maintain their operations and were forced to leave their land. Some voluntarily deeded their farms to creditors, others faced foreclosure by banks, and still others had to leave temporarily to search for work to provide for their families. In fact, at the peak of farm transfers in 1933–34, nearly 1 in 10 farms changed possession, with half of those being involuntary (from a combination of the depression and drought).

What was the primary reason for the increased agricultural expansion in the early 1920s, as mentioned in the passage?

The Contributions of Immigrants to American Culture

Starting in 1875, a series of restrictions on immigration were enacted. They included bans on criminals, people with contagious diseases, polygamists, anarchists, beggars and importers of prostitutes. Other restrictions targeted the rising number of Asian immigrants, first limiting migration from China and later banning immigration from most Asian countries.

By the early 1900s, the nation’s predominant immigration flow shifted away from northern and western European nations and toward southern and eastern Europe. In response, laws were passed in 1921 and 1924 to try to restore earlier immigration patterns by capping total annual immigration and imposing numerical quotas based on immigrant nationality that favored northern and western European countries.

Long-standing immigration restrictions began to crumble in 1943, when a law allowed a limited number of Chinese to immigrate. In 1952, legislation allowed a limited number of visas for other Asians, and race was formally removed as grounds for exclusion. Although a presidential commission recommended scrapping the national-origins quota system, Congress did not go along.

In 1965, though, a combination of political, social and geopolitical factors led to passage of the landmark Immigration and Nationality Act that created a new system favoring family reunification and skilled immigrants, rather than country quotas. The law also imposed the first limits on immigration from the Western Hemisphere. Before then, Latin Americans had been allowed to enter the U.S. without many restrictions. Since enactment of the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act, immigration has been dominated by people born in Asia and Latin America, rather than Europe.

Several laws since then have focused on refugees, paving the way for entrance of Indochinese refugees fleeing war violence in the 1970s and later including relief for other nationalities, including Chinese, Nicaraguans and Haitians. A 1990 law created the “temporary protective status” that has shielded immigrants, mainly Central Americans, from deportation to countries facing natural disasters, armed conflicts or other extraordinary conditions.

In 1986, Congress enacted another major law – the Immigration Reform and Control Act – that granted legalization to millions of unauthorized immigrants, mainly from Latin America, who met certain conditions. The law also imposed sanctions on employers who hired unauthorized immigrants. Subsequent laws in 1996, 2002 and 2006 were responses to concerns about terrorism and unauthorized immigration. These measures emphasized border control, prioritized enforcement of laws on hiring immigrants and tightened admissions eligibility.

Select the terms from below that would complete the sentence appropriately:

In 1965, a combination of political, social, and geopolitical factors led to the passage of the landmark (choose a, b, or c) and (choose d, e, or f) Act that created a new system favoring family reunification and skilled immigrants, rather than country quotas.

Berlin Airlift: Using Aid as a Tool of Diplomacy

After World War II, Germany and its capital Berlin were divided in two. The western Allies (including the United States) occupied West Germany and West Berlin. The Soviet Union occupied East Germany and East Berlin. At this time, the United States and the Soviet Union were allies but were soon at odds when faced with the challenge of how to rebuild the political, economic, and infrastructure of war-torn Europe.

In June of 1948, the Soviets blocked the West’s access to West Berlin in an attempt to seize control of the entire city. President Harry S Truman’s administration responded with the Berlin Airlift: a massive campaign to drop food and supplies to West Berliners from the air.

By using aid as a diplomatic tool instead of a military attack, the United States kept the West Berliners supplied for nearly a year. Not wanting to risk a military confrontation, the Soviet Union backed down and opened the roads to the West in May of 1949. Near the border with Soviet-controlled Poland, the city of Berlin was geographically vulnerable to communist influence. Citizens of West Berlin were surrounded and could not pass freely to East Berlin or through East Germany to travel to western democratic nations.

Thirteen years later, Berlin again became the center of Cold War tensions when, in a surprise move, the Soviets literally built the Berlin Wall overnight, dividing the city in half.

During the Berlin Airlift in 1948, what was the primary objective of the United States’ response to the Soviet blockade of West Berlin?

Liberties or Rights?

In American history, the Constitution has played a pivotal role in shaping the nation’s commitment to civil liberties. The Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution, guarantees individual freedoms, including freedom of speech, religion, and the right to a fair trial. This foundation has been crucial in various historical movements, such as the Civil Rights Movement, where activists invoked constitutional principles to fight against racial discrimination.What is the difference between a liberty and a right? Both words appear in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights. The distinction between the two has always been blurred, and today the concepts are often used interchangeably. However, they do refer to different kinds of guaranteed protections.

Civil liberties are protections against government actions. For example, the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights guarantees citizens the right to practice whatever religion they please. Government, then, cannot interfere in an individual’s freedom of worship. Amendment I gives the individual “liberty” from the actions of the government.

Civil rights, in contrast, refer to positive actions of government should take to create equal conditions for all Americans. The term “civil rights” is often associated with the protection of minority groups, such as African Americans, Hispanics, and women. The government counterbalances the “majority rule” tendency in a democracy that often finds minorities outvoted.

Which of the following best distinguishes between civil liberties and civil rights in the context of government actions?

Income Inequality, Social Mobility, and the Decision to Drop Out of High School

It is widely documented that places with higher levels of income inequality have lower rates of social mobility. But it is an open question whether and how higher levels of inequality actually lead to lower rates of mobility. We propose that one channel through which higher rates of income inequality might lead to lower rates of upward mobility is lower rates of human capital investment among low-income individuals. Specifically, we posit that greater levels of income inequality could lead low-income youth to perceive a lower rate of return on investment in their own human capital. Such an effect would offset any potential “aspirational” effect coming from higher educational wage premiums.

The data are consistent with this prediction: Individuals from low socioeconomic backgrounds are more likely to drop out of school if they live in a place with a greater gap between the bottom and middle of the income distribution. This finding is robust in relation to a number of specification checks and tests for confounding factors. This analysis offers an explanation for how income inequality might lead to a perpetuation of economic disadvantage, and it has implications for the types of interventions and programs that would effectively promote upward mobility among youth of low socioeconomic status.

According to the passage, what does the proposed channel through which higher levels of income inequality might lead to lower rates of upward mobility primarily involve?