Question

information on profits and risks of various investment types, provided by english commercial banks and other private lenders to prospective investors, 1750 to 1850
investment opportunity | expected rate of return or loss if known (per year, per £)
lend to great britain | 3-4% per year
invest in domestic enterprises in great britain | 5-12% per year
lend to india | 10-12% per year
lend to european enterprises in asia or china | 10-15% per year
lend to indian or chinese business in asia or china | 15-20% per year
which of the following conclusions is best supported by the data in the table?
a. traditional elites introduced complex financial practices
b. financial practices facilitated deeper global economic integration
c. transnational businesses accompanied the emergence of joint-stock companies
d. governments sought to stabilize economic activity through lending

Explanation:

First, analyze each option against the data in the table:

1. Option A: The table only lists profit rates for different lending/investment types, with no data on "complex financial practices" introduced by traditional banks, so this is unsupported.
2. Option B: The table shows that lending to European merchants in Asia or China has the highest expected profit rate (10-12% per year), which is higher than lending to the British government (3-4% per year) or domestic British enterprises (4-6% per year). This indicates financial actors (banks/private lenders) had incentives to engage in global overseas enterprise due to higher returns, so this is supported.
3. Option C: The table provides no information about whether "proto-industrial investment" (lending to domestic enterprises) was linked to "risk compounding" compared to other options, so this is unsupported.
4. Option D: The table does not include data on how lending impacted "economic stability" in different regions, so this is unsupported.

Answer:

B. Financial practices facilitated deeper global overseas enterprise