In his book, A People's History of the United States, Howard Zinn cites examples from US colonial history of the gap between rich and poor in colonial life.
A key study cited by Zinn examined tax registers from Boston, showing that the top 1% of the population held 25% of the wealth in 1687, and that by 1770, the top 1% of property owners in Boston owned 44% of the wealth. The study also noted that the bulk of Boston's population were not property owners. The percentage of adult males in Boston who owned no property doubled between 1687 and 1770 (from 14% to 29%).
Zinn cited additional items, regarding overcrowding of poorhouses (giving a notable example from New York) and a general increase throughout the colonies of the "wandering poor" who had no real means of support. He also cited examples of workers' strikes against employers in the colonies because of low wages.
I think the answer is... C. Your welcome!
The price of oil doubled per barrel, then quadrupled and challenged the stability of the whole national economy.
The major similarity between these two documents is that both reflect the idea that there should be limitations on the power of the government. This is an important idea that is one of the major bases of our entire system of government today. The major difference between the two is the degree of democracy that they contemplate. The Magna Carta is really meant as a contract between the king and his nobles, giving the nobles guarantees against the king. By contrast, the Declaration of Independence is a call for equality and rights for all people (or at least all white men). This means the Declaration is far more democratic than the Magna Carta.
They invaded other countries without provocation in order to add teritory
