Based on this module's concepts and the context of climate change and sea-level rise, how could a person reasonably justify a ban on buying properties with high-risk of flooding? a. Nozickians would justify the banning of buying high-risk properties if it could be proved that real state brokers manipulate the sales and mislead buyers about their odds of flooding in these properties.
b. Rawlsians would justify the banning of buying high-risk properties because mostly poor people will buy them. Thus, buying these properties redistributes money from the poor to the rich, making society's least advantaged group even worse off.
c. Utilitarians would justify the banning of buying high-risk properties because mostly poor people buy them. Thus, buying these properties redistributes money from the poor, who have high marginal utilities of money, to the rich, who have lower marginal utilities of money.
d. All of the other answers are true.

b. would be the answer if not try c

hope this correct me if my answer is wrong if i am correct can you plz give me brainliest

: ) : 0 : o : d

explanation:

answer: i looked it up

explanation: in 1955 in montgomery, alabama, a girl refused to give up her seat on a public bus. the girl was black, and the passenger looking to take her seat was white. this is a familiar tale, but it's not about rosa parks. the girl in the story is a 15-year-old high school student named claudette colvin, and this act of defiance occurred nine months before rosa parks did the same thing. colvin was arrested, and her case is what led to the u.s. supreme court's order for the desegregation of alabama's bus system. so, why don't we know colvin's name? "later i had a child born out of wedlock; i became pregnant when i was 16," colvin says. "and i didn't fit the image either, of, you know, someone they would want to show off.

during the hitler era and it caused them to declare war on germany