Compare the demand for water with the demand for wine. The demand for winewine is likely A. relatively more inelasticinelastic because winewine is a necessitynecessity. B. relatively more elasticelastic because winewine is a luxuryluxury. C. relatively more elasticelastic because winewine is a necessitynecessity. D. equally elastic as the demand for waterwater. E. relatively more inelasticinelastic because winewine is a luxuryluxury.

A. relatively more inelastic because water is a necessity

Explanation:

Inelastic goods refers to the type of goods which demand wouldn't move that much regardless of the price change.

This tends to be the case for every products that are considered as necessity.

If let's say the price of water is $1 per bottle.  We all know that every human being need to drink at least 1.5 L of it to stay alive. If all producers of water decided to raise the price into $2 ,the customers would most likely still purchase it.  They have no choice.

there are no options provided but you can choose among the following gender-neutral pronouns: zir, hir, eir, vis, tem, eir.

in the normal course of maintaining a pronoun-antecedent agreement, we could have used the words his or her but since we are also required to use gender-neutral language, we need to replace it with its equivalent gender-neutral pronoun.

the anti federalists was a movement that was opposed to the creation of a us federal government. although they were not as organized as the federalists, they also had a large group of leaders, especially in state politics.

the statement "now, in a large extended country, it is impossible to have a representation, possessing the sentiments, and of integrity, to declare the minds of the people” represents the concerns of the anti federalists.

they strongly believed that the federalists were representing the interests of aristocratic elements of society at the expense of the majority of ordinary people, who lived in a rural society.

their fear for the creation of a strong federal government and the president’s power of veto in their opinion would create a tyrannical rule that would dominate the people. they defended the importance of restraining the government’s power towards people at any cost.