1.What role did the military play in shaping the economy of Brazil?

The military was very impactful in shaping the economy of Brazil. They
defined economic growth, the generals also fostered investments from
foreign nations. Lastly they began development projects that took place in
the amazon jungle, this helped the economy increase greatly due to people
wanting to see the achievements.
2. What were some of the positive benefits of one-party rule in Mexico?
The one party in Mexico did not rule as military dictators, but instead a
ruling party. The ruling party dominated Mexico and benefited the nation
in many ways. For example, tried to make a better life for peasants along
with workers, also land reforms were carried and rights were premoted.
This caused the Mexican oil industry to become nationalized later kicking
out forigen oil companies and made a state run oil industry.

3. What effect did the Falklands war have on the military government in
Argentina?
When Argentina was defeated the general was humiliated and stepped
down. Him stepping down caused an election and Rual Alfosin was elected
as the president for the first free election in a long time.

4. Review the chart of Population Living in Poverty

[a] In which three countries of La tin America is the percentage of
people living in poverty the lowest?
Argentina, Chile, and Urguguay is the lowest percentage.

[b] In which three countries is the poverty rate highest?

Bolvia, Ecuador, and Colombia is the highest percentage.

5. After reading this excerpt, in your opinion, has the military

dictatorships in L.A. nations been bad or good for the nations'
growth? Explain your answer in two paragraphs [minimum].
In my opinion I believe that the military dictatorships in L.A nations have
been all together, bad. This is because it was showed in every way that
when the time came that they were under a democratic government, they
would have nothing but good reforms and everything would run smoothly.
However, when the nations are under a military government wars broke
out and the reforms were not met to what they needed. I understand
that in Brazil they were run under a military government and things ran
smoothly and even bettered their economy! However, in the end every
nation is different and different things will help and hurt different
nations. In conclusion, in my opinion I think that it depends on the way the
citizens of their nations want to be treated by government. If the
citizens are fine with the way things are going then, that is their right to
government. However, military government is not a good aspect for a
nation who needs to grow.

While reading, define/explain each term or name below and write a

sentence regarding its significance to the topic:
a. Brazilia- The new capital city in the countries interior.
b. Land reform- Breaking up large estates and distributing the land
to pesants.
c. Standard of living- Material of comfort, which is judged by the
amount of goods people have.
d. Recession- Slow down in the economy.
e. PRI- Institutional Revolutionary Party, main force for political
stability in Mexico

f. NAFTA- North America free trade agreements which removed

trade barriers between Mexico, the US, and Canada.
g. Nationalization of an industry- To bring under the ownership of
industry.
h. Welfare state- Created by the Perons which offered social
programs with broad popular appeal but little freedom.