Answer:
China has had a mixed economical development.
Explanation:
In spite of the fact that China was supposed to be a communist country, the country has been experiencing an incredible economical growth in the last 30 years, this as a result of its re-orientation in the production inside global capitalism in the 1980s, which is ironic taking into account its colonial legacy. China and its governors understood that this was the change they needed to experience in order to really grow as the powerful country it is nowadays. Also, its huge population plays an important role; The country is able to manage three different work divisions: Intensive - Extensive work exportations and high technology, communication and aviation. As a conclusion, China has been experiencing many changes which allowed the nation to become economically strong and thanks to its population, the country will continue developing in all areas and fields.
To work on plantations to make profits.
<u>Original Question: </u><u><em>How did advances in electricity affect the city in the late 19th and early 20th centuries?</em></u>
<u>Answer: Choice (D)</u> or <u>All of the Above</u>
<u></u>
<em>Reason: Electricity powered a lot of things like streetcars and elevators which were modern inventions that helped better people's lives. However, such things required people to maintain them, and thus opened up new job opportunities</em>
<em />
Hope that helped!
Answer:
All cities were built on river banks. While Mohenjo-Daro was built on the right bank of the Indus River, Harappa was built on the left bank of the river Ravi. In terms of their circuit, both measure about 5 km. The ground plans, which included the street layouts, house blocks are also common in many ways.That the Aryans and the Harappans were one people, both 'fully indigenous'. They claimed that the proto-Indo-European language family, of which Sanskrit is a part, was created by these indigenous folks and taken to the west—the Out of India Theory (OIT).
Based on the given claims above made by Historians 1 and 2, the one that best describes Historian 2's statement is this: <span>A counterclaim refuting Historian 1's claim. The answer for this would be option A. Hope this is the answer that you are looking for. Have a great day!</span>