Aristocracy is the form of government (politeia) advocated in Plato's Republic. This regime is ruled by a philosopher king, and thus is grounded on wisdom and reason.
That is because companies started moving to china because the Chinese workers were paid less so naturally the companies wanted to earn more money and cut losses by firing the Mexican workers and outsourcing their factories and positions to China.
<span />
The economic value of having colonies in the first place was for 3 main reasons
1) attain cheap labour from the native peoples
2) acquire cheap raw materials to bring to the homeland (Europe)
3) open up new markets to trade with
the first two were vital in Britains industrial revolution. Without cheap raw materials, and cheap labourers, the factories and refineries in Britain would have costed far more to maintain and keep supplied. This, in turn, would have slowed down production considerably. There is no doubt in my mind that the industrial revolution would still have taken place in Britain with or without the colonies, but WITH the colonies the process was sped up considerably.
Overall, cheap labour and raw materials attained through Britains colonial interests sped up the industrialisation of the UK.
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Unfortunately, you did not include options to answer the question.
However, we can answer it based on our knowledge of the subject.
The arrival in Texas of the industries of munitions, shipbuilding, and petroleum was the direct result of the war.
Yes, industrialization and the fabrication of ships, supplies for the war, and the development of the oil industry was a direct result of the United States entering World War I.
With the United States entering the war, the troops at the war front needed all kinds of war supplies. Oil played a key role as an important raw material in the industries, as well as steel for shipbuilding. Industries had to work hard to comply with the war demanding and the US army necessities in Europe.
