This allows Dracula not only to show his higher stature within the class system but also allows him to physically place himself above the lower classes. The Castle itself is adorned with various items of value such as ‘curtains and upholstery’ being ‘of fabulous value when made’ giving the reader the impression of wealth that was from ancestry and not new money again giving the impression of nobility and stature. Within Dracula the theme of blood can be interpreted as capital. As Dracula draws the blood from his victims he is taking capital from the lower class. ‘Blood is too precious a thing’ without this capital they would not survive.
Over the course of the fifteenth century the English nobility had grown in power, however Henry VII was quite fortunate that 25% of leading noble lines had died out. Henry limited the power of the lords to a level he felt he could control better. Plummeting the number of lords meant that he could also control the size and level of the nobility. Henry chose wealthy nobles to the senior social echelons; he also chose them because they could be able to help fund larger armies. Whilst choosing the wealthier nobles he was reducing threat to himself.
The majestic building was something that the upper-class Europeans would yearn for, thus making the foreigners look respectable in their eyes. Moreover, it is not surprising that the Europeans would suddenly take interest in such a momentous place. Polo continued to describe the paradise he visited. The Khan owned extensive chambers and halls where he kept his belongings and his ladies and his concubines. Parks of game and lust herbage between the inner and outer walls were something to marvel at.
As is stated in the article, the company used to have a major competitive advantage in terms of movie selection, where, “…customers could browse through thousands of titles…” (Hitt 106). Now, the entire scope of the market has changed and Blockbuster was much too slow to respond. The recent moves that it has made will surely generate profits, but not enough to sustain the company in the long run, seeing as there is nothing that differentiates Blockbuster’s services from that of its competitors. In order to fully gain lost market share back, the company would have to create some sort of highly innovative way of viewing or renting movies that none of its competitors has already thought of; It would have to be something that is rare, difficult to imitate, not easily substituted, and able to generate above-average returns. Unfortunately, at this point it looks as if none of this will come into fruition because Blockbuster has essentially decided to latch on to other companies, creating a sort of symbiotic relationship where the company feeds off of the success of its competitors.
Again, it could be presumed that Sir Philip Francis is also a member of the aristocracy, it also says in the quote that after winning the election, Francis ‘had a dinner at the castle, and a famous ball in the evening.’ Although this isn’t conclusive proof that Francis was a member of the aristocracy, it shows that he was in a very good position, and certainly not an average civilian. Another point all the sources agree on is the inequality of constituency size. For instance, in source A it says ‘the country of Yorkshire, which contains near a million souls, sends two county members and so does the county of Rutland, which contains not a hundredth part of that number.’ This shows the unfairness of the electoral system, because if you lived in a smaller borough, you had a much greater chance of having your opinion heard than if you lived somewhere like Manchester, which still only had two county members and yet many, many more constituents. This is partially the same as sources B and C, as B is a report of the Borough of Gatton, a borough that was famously rotten because of it’s tiny size (and yet still had two county members), which like source A shows the inequality of size. In
While his practices were eventually made illegal in many cases, it is undeniable that his domination of the oil industry increased its efficiency, safety, and stabilized its market price. In my opinion, because of the many companies that were eliminated by Rockefellers practices, laws like the Sherman Act in many ways did serve the public good. While on some levels I respect his business acumen, it was certainly not good for a a you company to make the backroom deals that unfairly drove many entrepreneurs to ruin. Undoubtedly, one must also take into consideration the fact that the growth of industry taking place was unprecedented in human history. Never before had technology, transportation, and communications come together to allow for such exponential growth on a global scale.
He also made better law enforcement by building the Court of Star Chamber. He also managed to marry his children to powerful men and women in other countries such as when he married his daughter Margaret to James IV of Scotland and his youngest daughter Mary to Louis XII of France which was a very tactical decision as France were very close by and may be able to get report of enemies before they reached England. I think that this is enough proof that Henry was a great and almighty king. I believe that out of politically, militarily and financially that Henry VII was most involved financially as he had enough money to give away to his son 4,500,000 pounds sterling away then he must have had ridiculous amounts of money and was probably one of the richest kings for England to ever have in comparison to the amount of money that was around at the
The countries which look after these artefacts may simply be wealthier and have better resources to protect and restore these historical artefacts, than their country of origin, and the main aim in general for everyone who cares for these historical objects, is to preserve these artefacts for future generations and to keep their history alive. 'In 1999 Shanghai displayed seventeen cases of antiquities from ancient Egypt. Yet the art came from Britain, not Egypt. The items were from the British Museum, sent on tour to Asia during its recent remodelling. Egypt cannot easily afford to mount such a show, and when it can, the art is typically shown in wealthy nations which have helped finance
The cash-strapped communities found this idea to be irresistible. Private prisons were paid according to the number of filled beds because of which these corporations constantly pushed for more inmates (Fisher, 2011). The very existence of a for-profit corporation raises an ethical issue: what are the implications of operating a prison on a purely profit motivation? A corporation has one bottom line and that is how to make as much money as they possibly can. There is no such thing as “enough.” It has a peculiar characteristic that it is legally bound to put its bottom line ahead of everything else, even the public good (Achbar et al., 2004).
Their US parks, Disneyland and Disneyworld, were extremely success- ful, and Tokyo Disneyland was so popular that on some days it could not accommodate the large number of visitors. Simply put, the company was making a great deal of money from its parks. However, the Tokyo park was franchised to others—and Disney management felt that it had given up too much profit with this arrangement. This would not be the case at Euro Disneyland. The company’s share of the venture was to be 49 per cent for which it would put up $160 million.