What steps should a person follow to care for a horse's feet?

To start with, you should always be sure to check a horse's hooves for rocks, nails, and other debris that can get stuck in the hoof or under the shoe. Second, be sure to check the hoof itself for cracks, blisters, or signs of disease. A horse's hoof is similar to human fingernails in that it is somewhat fragile and requires regular observation and proper nutrition to keep in good condition. Biotin is very good for hooves, much like for fingernails, and without proper vitamins/nutrition, a horse's hooves can become brittle and crack, causing more problems in the future. It's important to determine what's normal for a particular horse day-to-day, too, especially regarding characteristics such as temperature, look, and texture, as hooves will vary between horses. It's good to establish what's normal for an individual horse through regular observation.

How does history help us understand poverty and economics?

History, which is the study of past events in order for us to comprehend and appreciate our present circumstances, is important for understanding poverty and economics because it serves as a useful map or guide that explains how wealth was, and is, divided throughout the members of society and world. History is a tool that can be used to help us understand why and how wealth and resources are unequally distributed to certain, or specific, individuals or to certain groups of individuals (e.g., social classes). Many historians, economists, political scientists, sociologists, and social and political philosophers have studied the relationship between history and wealth; however, none more prominently than the great nineteenth-century German theorist Karl Marx (1818–1883).
Marxism (as his theories of "Economic Determinism" have collectively come to be called) studies the history of human societies and their social relationships, along with the economical modes of production that are essential for their existence. Marxism, as a theory, is rooted in the understanding and comprehension of, what Marx calls, "historical materialism." Historical materialism is the belief that all of history can be told in the story of social classes and their struggle over the scarce resources that are found in nature and society. Historical materialism believes an individual's life choices, and thus their consciousness, is determined by their relationship to wealth and the modes of production that are able to produce wealth. Therefore, economics are the basis, or the foundation, of just about everything that is important within historical human society (i.e., the social structure). The important societal attributes that arise from society's economic base are things such as political laws and institutions, moral and deviant behaviors, customs, culture, crimes, and so on.
In short, human beings must work on, and within, nature to produce a means of subsistence in order to ensure their survival and their offspring's survival. In order to accomplish this, societies will naturally create a division of labor where work is divided among the masses. Without fail, certain work will be more valued than other work, and when this occurs, certain individuals will inherit more of the resources and property (i.e., wealth) than others. This will inherently create divisions of wealth, or in other words, social classes will form based on property ownership. These fortunate individuals will own the modes of production and will be able to live off of the labor of others. This way of life of the dominant, or ruling, class will be passed on from generation to generation, with each succeeding generation gaining more and more wealth and thus more and more power, while the others (the workers and the poor) will have less wealth and less power each generation.
However, according to Marx, society is not a static framework. It is a dynamic system where changes that occur in society's productive forces can produce changes in people's consciousness. This can create a social revolution if the dominant class is overthrown or displaced by a new emerging class, thus creating a new social system or social hierarchy. Marx believes you will see this occur throughout the many stages of human history, and if you want to understand the economics of today, or of any time, just understand the natural and social forces that make up human history.

History plays a vital role in the development of poverty and a country's economic situation.
The Republic of South Africa provides an ideal example of this. Under the laws of Apartheid, black people were seen as inferior to white people in every way, and they did not have opportunities to work or be educated in the same way. This, simply put, led to massive divide between the rich (white) and poor (black).
Then, when Apartheid ended and everybody was seen as equal in the eyes of the law, the legacy of this division continued in economic terms. Black people who had not been educated under Apartheid were still not educated—they had their freedom and their vote, but did not miraculously receive the education and funding required to place them on the socio-economic platform that they should be on.Therefore, South Africa's history of division and injustice still plays a huge role in the country's economic situation today. There are huge problems associated with programs like Black Economic Empowerment and Affirmative Action, which are all a result of the country's history.

What parallels might be drawn from the way Noah describes his dog, Fufi, and how he describes himself in his youth in the book Born A Crime?

Trevor Noah and his mother end up with two dogs when his mother's coworker offers them up. The coworker's dog is a Maltese poodle who mated with the neighbor's bull terrier. Noah calls this "a strange mix." Noah himself is "mixed," born to a black mother and white father. They met when Patricia was renting a room from Robert.
Fufi is "beautiful but stupid." Years later they find out Fufi is really just deaf. Noah tells us that

Fufi could do all sorts of tricks. She could jump super high . . . Fufi was a little rascal as well.

Similarly, Noah is an active child.

I was hyperactive, too. I craved constant stimulation and activity . . . I loved to be chased. I thought it was a game.

Noah learns a valuable lesson when he finds out Fufi has been spending time with another family.

The hard thing was understanding that Fufi wasn’t cheating on me with another boy. She was merely living her life to the fullest. Until I knew that she was going out on her own during the day, her other relationship hadn't affected me at all. Fufi had no malicious intent.

Noah describes himself in a similar way, noting his nature is not "bad," just like Fufi is not bad:

If you weren't engaging me, you were in trouble. I wasn't a shit to people. I wasn't whiny and spoiled. I had good manners. I was just high-energy and knew what I wanted to do.

While their other dog, Panther, is named for her pink nose, Noah says,

Fufi, I don't know where her name came from.

There is also no story behind the name Trevor:

When it was time to pick my name, she chose Trevor, a name with no meaning whatsoever in South Africa, no precedent in my family. It's not even a Biblical name. It's just a name. My mother wanted her child beholden to no fate. She wanted me to be free to go anywhere, do anything, be anyone.

Finally, Noah draws the comparison between himself and a dog:

My mom used to take me to the park so she could run me to death to burn off the energy. She'd take a Frisbee and throw it, and I'd run and catch it and bring it back. Over and over and over. Sometimes she'd throw a tennis ball. Black people's dogs don't play fetch; you don't throw anything to a black person's dog unless it's food. So it was only when I started spending time in parks with white people and their pets that I realized my mom was training me like a dog.

Do you think Jane is right in her assessment of Mrs. Reed in Jane Eyre?

The entire book is from Jane Eyre's point of view. While she does come across as a reliable narrator, there are naturally some doubts as to the accuracy of characters and events as she describes them. In the case of Mrs. Reed, there is enough contextual evidence to surmise that Jane is correct in concluding that "living, she had ever hated me—dying, she must hate me still."
Firstly, it is true that the Reed children were allowed to abuse young Jane with impunity. This aligns with the adults the Reed children become, as they are deeply flawed, selfish, and unkind even to one another. The lifelong characteristics of the Reed children betray a level of mean-spiritedness (particularly for Jane) that they inherited from their mother.
Secondly, Mrs. Reed goes to great length to discredit young Jane before sending her off to school, "sowing aversion and unkindness along [Jane's] future path." Mrs. Reed will soon be rid of Jane, but she gives an unnecessary and derogatory description of Jane to Mr. Brocklehurst. This is not the momentary irritation of a strained caretaker but a deliberate and cooly dealt blow to young Jane's future.
Finally, and perhaps most telling of all, is that Mrs. Reed concealed the fact that Jane had other relatives who were willing to take responsibility for her well-being. Ostensibly handing Jane over to other relatives would have made both Jane and Mrs. Reed happier, yet she chose to keep Jane under lock and key. Why? The answer that leaps to mind is bitterness, if not full-fledged cruelty.
While the negative qualities of Mrs. Reed may have been exaggerated by the fraught emotions of a lonely and frightened child, there are too many other corroborating events in the plot that validate Jane's characterization of Mrs. Reed. In short, yes, Jane Eyre was right in her assessment of Mrs. Reed as a hard-hearted woman.

Give any two uses of folic acid.

Folic acid is a form of the water soluble B vitamin. It can be found in foods such as dried beans, oranges, peas, lentils, various whole wheat products (bread, pasta, etc.), beets, asparagus, broccoli, spinach, and brussels sprouts. The human body uses folic acid to help the body make and maintain new cells. Additionally, folic acid is a possible cancer-fighting substance because of the way that it helps prevent genetic changes that possibly lead to cancer. Folic acid can also be prescribed as a medication. In this usage, folic acid is a treatment tool for folic acid deficiency and/or specific types of anemia. Folic acid is also often taken by pregnant women in order to prevent miscarriage and prevent birth defects like spina bifida.
https://www.drugs.com/folic_acid.html

https://www.webmd.com/vitamins/ai/ingredientmono-1017/folic-acid

What are some examples of arguments with fallacies from April 2019 (the most updated ones)?

Logical fallacies are prevalent in the arena of politics. This might be expected, as political discourse involves plenty of argumentation, and one of the key persuasive factors of arguments is that they adhere to logic. One way to locate logical fallacies in today’s political discourse is to peruse hot-button issues in the news and read opinion editorials and reputable blogs that engage the issues in argument.
Here are two examples of fallacious reasoning ("cherry-picking" and "straw man" fallacies, respectively) that have recently emerged:
1. From an April 29th The Stranger article reporting on the Washington state legislature’s vote on April 26th to get rid of the state’s ban on affirmative action (in other words, affirmative action will now be allowed in the state):

Sen. Keith Wagoner (R-Sedro Woolley)…argued that the very presence of Sen. Joe Nguyen in Senate chambers was an argument against the bill. "He's proof that our system lets people move up," Wagoner said.
I knew that was going to happen," said Sen. Nguyen over the phone after the vote. "I knew they were going to use me as an example for why we don't need this."

Senator Wagoner’s argument here is an example of a fallacy that is sometimes called the “anecdotal fallacy,” or the “cherry-picking fallacy.” Both of these fallacies refer to the logical error of presenting a single piece, or a small batch, of evidence as support for a conclusion, when a much broader swathe of evidence is necessary.
In this example, Senator Wagoner cites the anecdotal fact that Senator Nguyen, who has Vietnamese heritage, has risen to the level of a state senator as an argument against the need for affirmative action. At first glance, it makes sense that Senator Wagoner points to the success of a person who identifies as a minority because affirmative action involves businesses, schools, and other institutions taking race, ethnicity, sex, and other factors into consideration as they admit, hire, sponsor, et cetera. But, in order to argue reasonably about affirmative action, which affects people across the state, Senator Wagoner would need to refer to statistics that represent a large set of people, not just one person.
Senator Nguyen later explained how his opponent’s reasoning fell short: "Just because one person gets through doesn't mean everyone has an equal opportunity to get through. We have barriers. They're systemic."
2. From an April 29th Politifact article dissecting a claim in a speech given by President Trump at a rally in Green Bay, Wisconsin on April 27th:

[Trump said that] with a late-term abortion, "the mother meets with the doctor. They take care of the baby, they wrap the baby beautifully. And then the doctor and the mother determine whether or not they will execute the baby."

Trump made this claim as an argument for a bill that includes criminal punishments for doctors who do not “preserve the life” of babies who are born alive despite a late-term abortion attempt. Trump characterizes the medical procedure as "execution." Yet, taking into account scientific facts and descriptions by doctors, the Politifact article points out that the circumstance treated by the bill would accurately be described as a decision "not to resuscitate"—a decision made by a mother and a medical team taking into consideration the survival outlook of the baby—and not a decision “to execute.” By mischaracterizing his opponent’s view, Trump commits a “straw man” fallacy. This is an error in reasoning where the speaker sets out to refute an argument that hasn’t actually been presented by the opponent.
We could also say Trump resorts to the fallacy of “emotional appeal.” The context of this example is an emotionally charged subject. As we attempt to stand outside of it and consider Trump’s argument objectively, we can see how his word choice exploits the emotional value of the subject. Now, appeals to emotion are often used effectively in persuasive texts—for example, in political speeches. Yet, in the context of logical argumentation, the attempt to persuade an audience by eliciting emotional reactions like anger, fear or disgust in place of presenting a logical sequence of reasoning would be considered fallacious. By ignoring the many essential facts around a complicated medical situation—and instead using the terminology of killing—Trump aims to elicit an emotional rather than a rational response from his audience.
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2019/apr/29/donald-trump/donald-trump-repeats-falsely-doctors-mothers-decid/

https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2019/04/29/40049619/after-20-years-washington-repeals-its-ban-on-affirmative-action

How did Fitzgerald portray the attitudes of the 1920s?

Fitzgerald was ahead of his time in articulating the defining elements of the 1920s. He recognized that the Jazz Age was rooted in "outer-directed" focus. This condition was one in which individuals lived for external reality and for the expectations of other people. Fitzgerald demonstrates a time period in which there is a noticeable lack of "inner-directed" guidance. For the most part, the Jazz Age is depicted as a monument built upon a firmament of sand.
The outer-directed nature of the time period ultimately reveals its emptiness. Underneath the glamour and glitz is a crippling hollowness, a vacant nothingness that underscores their existence.
Fitzgerald operates as both storyteller and historian in how he is able to detail this aspect of the 1920s. To a great extent, Fitzgerald shows how the excessive "outer-directed" condition of being helps to perpetuate unsound economic habits that would inevitably lead to the 1929 Stock Market Crash.