1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
cupoosta [38]
3 years ago
12

How will an increased supply of imported Mexican fruits and vegetables most likely affect Texas' economy?

History
2 answers:
spayn [35]3 years ago
8 0
The answer is B, it will drive down prices. If the supply of something is high, not many people will extremely desire it. But if the supply was low, more people would want it because it is rare and worth more. 
NikAS [45]3 years ago
4 0
<span>Answer is A. It will drive up demand.The increased supply of imported Mexican fresh produce greatly affect Texas’ economy and growing incredibly fast, which are creating opportunities for produce companies and industries such as food retailers, transportation, and many others. <span>
</span></span>
You might be interested in
List 2 actions of Andrew Jackson that supported Indian Removal?
kiruha [24]

Answer:

The Indian Removal Act was signed into law by President Andrew Jackson on May 28, 1830, authorizing the president to grant unsettled lands west of the Mississippi in exchange for Indian lands within existing state borders. A few tribes went peacefully, but many resisted the relocation policy.

Explanation:

What does Jackson name as the advantages of the Indian Removal Act for the United States? Native American removal would reduce conflict between the federal and state governments. It would allow white settlers to occupy more of the South and the West, presumably protecting from foreign invasion.

6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Carolina planters tried to avoid social isolation by
taurus [48]

carolina planters tried to avoid social isolation by attending events in cities.

Answer: d

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Why was Portugal among the first of the European nations to begin exploring in the early 1400s? Question 15 options: Portugal wa
Dmitry [639]

Explanation:

c wait for more I'm not sure

7 0
3 years ago
List the factors which brought The first world War?​
yanalaym [24]

1. Friends don’t let friends fight alone

A tangled web of strong political alliances among nations meant that most great powers felt obliged to help their partners once war was declared.

After the murder of an Austrian Archduke by Serbian assassins, Austria-Hungary prepared for war against Serbia, which was allied with Russia.

Once Russia mobilized, Austria-Hungary’s ally, Germany, declared war on both Russia and Russia’s ally, France. Great Britain and its empire, sympathetic to France, declared war on Germany (Canada was not consulted).

Alliances originally intended as defensive pacts ended up looking threatening to outsiders. This perilous network of allegiances is an accepted part of all narratives about the First World War. German historian Andreas Hilgruber was one of many who showed how dangerous and costly all of these alliances were.

2. Armed to the teeth

Europe in 1914 was armed to the teeth. Vast fleets of warships were being constructed, conscription was implemented in most of the great powers to allow large armies to be kept in reserve, weapons and ammunition were stockpiled, and detailed war plans were made.

The impact of the proliferation of the instruments of war as a cause of the outbreak of the conflict was highlighted by David Stevenson’s Armaments and the Coming of War (1996). A large army spoiling for a fight may well seek one out.

3. Capitalist imperialism

During the First World War, Vladimir Lenin, the father of the Soviet Union, wrote an essay entitled Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism (1917), in which he laid out the foundation of his own philosophy of communism.

He believed that the war was the product of capitalist financial monopolies within states, which created national rivalries and led the great powers into a destructive conflict over access to raw materials and undeveloped markets.

Others since have blamed imperialism itself and commercial interests.

4. War on a tight schedule

A.J.P. Taylor, one of the 20th century’s great historians, argued in War by Timetable (1969) that in 1914, thanks to relatively new transportation (railroad) and communications (telegraph and telephone) technologies, every European power believed that the ability to mobilize their armies faster than their neighbours would by itself deter war.

Every power drafted elaborate mobilization timetables so that they could outrace their potential opponents. When the crisis of 1914 occurred, none of the leaders really wanted war, according to Taylor, but each felt they had to mobilize faster than the others or lose the advantage.

They became the victims of their own logistical preparations, and Europe slid unwillingly but relentlessly into war. Barbara Tuchman’s book The Guns of August (1962) similarly identified the dangers of technology in causing conflicts to escalate rapidly.

5. Blame Germany

In the Treaty of Versailles that officially ended the war, Germany was made to accept the blame for causing the conflict, and after that German governments spent decades denying their sole responsibility.

They convinced many people, but after the Second World War, German historian Fritz Fischer looked into previously-classified archives for the first time. Fischer concluded in his book German War Aims in the First World War (1961) that Imperial Germany had deliberately provoked a general war as part of a policy of conquest much like that undertaken by Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Germany 20 years later.

Fischer’s conclusions remain controversial to this day.

6. No, blame Britain

The idea that Britain caused the war was the live grenade that firebrand historian Niall Ferguson lobbed into the debate when he wrote The Pity of War (1999), though Paul Schroeder had put forward a similar argument earlier.

Ferguson claimed that not only did British statesmen encourage France and Russia to oppose Germany, but that Britain’s own intervention turned a regional European brawl into a global war.

The British may not have directly started it, according to Ferguson, but they were liable for greatly expanding the scope of the war and making it drag on as long as it did.

7. People being people

Canadian historian Margaret Macmillan has published a major book, The War That Ended Peace (2013), which presents a synthesis of many different factors: alliances and power politics; reckless diplomacy; ethnic nationalism; and, most of all, the personal character and relationships of the almost uncountable number of historical figures who had a hand in the coming of war.

Her work helps to highlight the fact that for all the great and powerful forces that seemed to grind the world inexorably into war in 1914, everything ultimately came down to the beliefs, prejudices, rivalries, and schemes of a great array of personalities and people.

3 0
4 years ago
Would modern liberals or modern conservatives accept the views of 19th century liberals ? Briefly explain your answer
Lady bird [3.3K]

Answer:

Explanation:

The words and concepts of Conservatism and Liberalism have changed in meaning since the nineteenth century.  Modern conservatives want less government intervention in their lives, which is the exact opposite of what it meant to be a conservative in the nineteenth century.  Another term for conservatism in this century is monarchism, as conservatives desired social stability through monarchical rule.  Conservatives believed in tradition and hierarchy to govern over a nation.  There were three main essential anchors of social harmony: Monarchy, Aristocracy and Church.  They did not believe that all men were created equal, and that some men were in fact born greater than others.  A nation has to have a wide reach into the lives of its citizens and that each nation was dedicated to increasing the power of the nation.  Liberals took another approach to the conservative thought of government intervention in its citizens’ lives.  They believed that each individuals had inherent rights and every citizen should be able to work their way up in the social class of the nation.  Their goal was complete economic, personal and political freedom.  Liberals were made up of primarily the middle class.  While the liberals sound like the good guys in the nineteenth century, it is important to keep in mind that they did not believe in giving power to women, the poor nor the uneducated.  Conservatism vs Liberalism was a battle between monarchs and the middle class to gain power.

8 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Why did the Magna Carta inspire later documents ?
    12·1 answer
  • Why did lord ashley and the other proprietors want to place settelments in carolina
    15·1 answer
  • I need help with this question
    13·1 answer
  • What factors led to the growing economic crisis in farming?
    8·1 answer
  • How did european colonies in the americas contribute to the start of the industrial revolution
    12·1 answer
  • South Carolina’s leaders responded to the Stono Rebellion by
    5·2 answers
  • imagine that you are a leader of a country that is facing extreme nationwide poverty. from which organizations would you seek as
    13·1 answer
  • What is the purpose of checks and balances in the federal government
    15·1 answer
  • What is true about the end of Reconstruction?
    13·1 answer
  • The group of humans who migrated worldwide from their beginnings in Africa were ____.
    10·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!