After reading through the textbook and discussing in class, what lessons from our first economic transformation in the 1820s to 50s can be applied to our current ecomonic state as a nation? Over the course of the weekend, come up with 3 solid plausible things that applies to this question. Your three ideas will constitute one comment, while you are also to post two additional comments to your classmates' ideas or reactions. Be sure to explain WHY your lessons are worthy of consideration.
We will have a discussion in class on Wednesday about this since you have your exam on Tuesday.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
67 comments:
The first half of the 19th century brought exciting changes and developments in work systems ad technology. It also saw the rise of the American corporation.
My factors are:
1. Development of better technology will be a faster way of communicating. Why is this important? One example can be talking. Before, conversations had to be prolonged and extended through months because of mail. Now mail is much quicker due to the improvements in means of transportations (better roads, faster cars, planes). Also, there are chatting programs such as AIM, MSN, and Yahoo! Chat (not to mention text messaging), where you can type conversations to people. Not only are there just conversations-plain words, but also there are video chats, and you can actually see the other person you are talking to. What does this do? This makes our world much smaller “it’s a small world after all” and more connected. For example, a father who is in China on a business trip can say goodnight to his son in America through video chat (if anyone has ever seen the Oreo commercial). Like the improvements in transportation such as railroads during the 19th century, which united the North and the South because the time that was needed to travel from the north to the south was shortened, the improvements in technology have improved the distance of people.
2. Need for social institutions also had a lesson in their creation. Because of the population surge, towns and cities had to create schools and hospitals to accommodate for people’s needs. One example could be OUR OWN school that has just recently added a whole new wing. Because each year our school gets more and more students, it will eventually be susceptible to overpopulation. This is the same case for a city or a town, if the population changes, officials will have to adjust the institutions according to the population. New technology, textiles, factories, stores of all sorts led to the creation of jobs in a concentrated areas, called cities, and these cities would have to adjust. So the lesson: Population growth will lead to demand of social institutions.
3. Growth of the economy will produce ambitious people. People are naturally drawn to money and wealth. Because the new technology was spurring the economy, more and more people tried to find ways to gain wealth. An example of when it happens in current times would be when someone invents a new product and wants to sell it, many of that person’s friends would want to try to get a piece of his profits by helping him. I don’t know exactly how to connect this point with the current economy since the current economy is really growing.
The years of 1820-1850 had economic developments and events similar to today's economic climate. Firstly, 1800's economy went through periods of boom and bust, reminiscent of our economy today. During the nineties there was a great expansion and now we are in a recession. Another similarity is the effect of technology on economic growth. Back then, there were steam engines and canals, today their is the internet. These are both innovations that facilitate the economy. Lastly, in the 1800s, economic development also led to an adverse effect on the environment. Back then, smog was let into the air and filth into the water which ravaged the natural ecosystem. This is similar to the present day effects of man causing global warming and other environmental issues. The economic climate of the 1800s had many parallels with that of today.
Lessons from my factors:
1. Periods of bust are natural for our economy, this recession will indeed pass in the natural cycle of things.
2. Technology always aids in economic boom, developments are good for the country.
3. Adverse effects on the environment are no new thing and must be avoided at all costs.
There are a plethora of lessons to be learned by the economic transformation in the 1820s-50s that can be applied to today:
1) Industrial/technological advancements lead to internal improvements.
2) Increased communications further effect the economy.
3) Regional specialization increase production.
All of these things still hold true today.
In response to what Kyle said about periods of bust following periods of boom and vice versa. I think it's evident that economic bliss being followed by a state of depression or recession is a strong parallel between the mid-1800s and today. It's a cycle that persists through the centuries and so far, has been pretty dependable. It's kind of comforting to know that although our economy isn't doing too hot right now, history tells us that it will get better.
The similarities in the past economic boom compared to our current situation offer us some solutions or lessons.
1)Investments are always ideal and necessary in the promotion of our economy. However, nowadays there are people like Madoff and Stanford.
2)Supply and demand. Right now we should not be building so many houses when consumers are not buying. We have enough houses to supply us for the next decade.
3)The creation of jobs is paramount especially in our current situation. Because many corporations have been firing employees or giving them shorter hours, we need jobs to support them.
I liked what kyle said about the evironment. I think the First American Revolution is parallel to the pending Environmental Revolution. Many people today are trying to find new ways to reduce our carbon footprint. New technology will lead to jobs, and more factories to produce these new invetions to help stop global warming.
In response to what alan said. I completely agree with the assertion regarding supply and demand. In these economic times, things should not really be made if no one is buying.
And yes Danielle, it kind of puts our economic situation in perspective now, it may not be anyones fault per se, could just be a natural cycle.
As the 1800s moved forward there were time of great economic prosperity and there were times of great hardship. It is from these lessons that we must mold the plans to return our country from this current economic downturn. Three major lessons are as follows:
1) Technological advances are key. They make current tasks easier, more efficient, and cheaper. Also, they create new jobs by allowing for more business's to hire , as well as for those in the field of this new technology.
2) Our economic system cannot always be on the upswing. There will be times where our economy turns to crap and we need to accept that. It is key however that we dont lose faith in the system and wait out the storm,
3) The most crucial cog in the economic machine are jobs. If people are working, they will spend money and that is how we recover.
I agree with Alan's comment about supply and demand, but there is no way the govt can manage that. It is the responsibility of the American people to recognize problems, such as building more housed than are being bought.
As previously stated to some extent, 1)technological advancements spur economic "boom."
2)technological "boom" is often followed by economic "bust". We can see this easily throuhg the economic bubble that just burst. While the bubble's growing, for example, the "dot-com" bubble, the economy seems thriving, however, once that bubble pops, economic recession returns. Sure, this recession is certainly to a far greater degree, however the cyclical pattern still holds true. 3)these technological advancements facilitating economic "boom/bust" are also contributing to the idea that the world is getting a lot smaller. Between text, video chat, and the internet in the palm of your hand, technology can create a far-reaching geographical connection, like the North/South connection made through textiles/cotton industries
As i previously mentioned, the geographical connections made through technology contribute to the "small world" idea that Amy brought up. Globalization and outsourcing also can give the impression that the world is "shrinking."
And in response to Alan, yes, creation of jobs is paramount. Job creation in factories like textiles was a coping mechanism with which the increasing population was maintained. Now, job creation is still of utmost importance. With an even bigger population issue, more competition, a recession, and some severe dissillusionment, job creation was one of the big issues in the recently signed economic stimulus package- certainly proving its relevence today.
Similarities between the first half of the 19th Century and our current economic panic/crisis are (my factors):
1. Technology clearly plays a crucial factor here. As Danielle mentioned, technology helps lead way for internal improvements. As well, technology helps create jobs... Did someone say energy? (reference to our current situation.) Also, technology makes the "virtual distance" of two places (i.e: Tokyo and New York City) smaller via web cams, cellphones, etc. Globalization...
2. The economy's growth, inclines and declines are also a factor. If the economy shoots up rapidly, that would worry analysts. Why? There's room to do worse. However, a growing economy is all that counts. It helps make more jobs, connects to technology, and creates an active citizen: stock market, bonds, investments. The more investing the better. Today, I see how people won't invest so the market goes down. BUT, why doesn't everyone invest and help it go up... just a little confused.
...still reading, so I'll post my third factor in a little bit.
About what Alan said about the housing market, I completely agree that the demand isn't what it used to be, and therefor real estate developers need to take it easy and lay off for a bit, since there is currently a surplus of housing. What we lack, however, is a supply of AFFORDABLE housing. I think that the government should focus on building developments that aren't as costly as some of the housing that is on the market now.
The first economic transformation in the 1820s to 50s was a result of several factors:
The British demand for cotton products, increased US demands for manufactured goods and the East-West configuration of the railroad lines created a rift that split the nation between the North and the SOuth. This rift caused these two regions to specify in industry suited for their climate, geography, social structure, and economic needs.
Industries lead to a sudden and immense growth in the cities of the North. The infrastructure of Northern cities collapsed under the weight of the growing population. Overcrowding led to the rapid spread of infectious diseases and an increase in crime among urban citizens.
The Southerners were focused on agrarian values. Thus the South focused on farming and producing raw materials, while the North transformed the raw material into manufactured products.
There were always be periods of bust in our economy, thus this recession will pass as we go through this cycle. Also, modernizing technology always aids in economic boom. If we are able to use solar energy, better use our natural resources, and become more productive in general, we can get out of our crisis faster. I agree with Danielle’s comment about housing. There must be cheaper but good-quality housing, for people to afford. This will increase the number of consumers, and thus allow us to get through the cycle of crisis faster.
I agree with Casey’s stance on the creation of jobs. Job creation in factories actually had a positive impact on our society. But, along with jobs, we should also focus on education. In the 1820s-1850s, the South had a rigid strata consisted of the landed aristocracy at the top and a huge underclass at the bottom. Social mobility was next to impossible in the South. Southerners did not hold education as a high priority and therefore as a whole the South had fewer educated citizens. This was a drawback to the South, and will be a drawback to us currently.
There are many lessons from our economic transformation during the early 1800s that can be easily applied to today.
First is the issue with natural resources. One of the largest points of conflict today is our depedence on fossil fuels, which are natural resources. This medium of energy, while significant in industrializing the 20th century, has led to an addiction that affects many social and political issues.
Second, the need for population growth is essential in economic growth. There needs to be a large working force to carry out the jobs required. If there is not one, immigrants provide the labor. This network of employment, while heavily criticized, continues to strengthen the economy. However, these immigrants bring negative aspects with them, unlike those of the 1800s (I will stop talking about immigrants, that is another discussion).
Third, capital invesment is a key aspect that ignited growth in the 1800s and does so today. Now, foreign investment spurs growth, but this outside souce of investment is crucial for long term growth. During the 1800s, foreign investment fundend one third of canals and one fourth of the railroads.
The transformation from the 1820’s to the 1850’s have a few parallels to society today. Firstly, as many have said before, technological advancements lead to globalization and faster modes of communication. Now, normal civilians have the ability to pick up their cell phones and text people in countries thousands of miles away.
Secondly, improvements have taken a toll on the environment both now and even in the past. Through the ease of travel and communication, a greater need for energy has been a result and because of this need people had to find easier ways of obtaining sufficient amounts through non-renewable resources.
Thirdly, as the economy grows, there has to be a point where the growth diminishes and a type of recession occurs. It is not possible for an economy to grow infinitely as history has shown. As of now, the economy seems to be heading on a downward spiral yet jobs from all the advancements in technology will aid in the stabilization of the economy.
Like Evan and others have touched upon the usage of national resources is a major concern. During the industrial revolution everyone continued without regard to the environment. At the time they were unaware of the negative effects of their actions, but I like to think we're more educated today. We need to find ways to be cleaner with out actions, and as much as I hate to say it, become green.
I agree with evan's comment about natural resources and our dependence on them. As our energy crisis unfolds, we need more technological ideas and plans to relieve us of this addiction to oil, etc and instead produce jobs in this field, thereby helping out the economy.
I also agree with Danielle's comment on affordable housing. One of the causes of the economic recession was the hefty mortgages that people were able to receive for houses that they knew they could not afford. With industrialization and new developments, people eventually migrate to this area for the new job opportunities causing new towns to set up and eventually cities.
The economic factors early on are almost identical to those of today except that the world is in a more modernized state. Dependency on foregin nations for raw materials and even the manufactoring is a major part of life which is reminicent of the relationship between the north and the south for cotton and and the manufactoring of textiles. Also, with population growth, the demand of jobs increases expenentially just like in the 1800's. Although sweat shops in the United States are illegal, and child labor greatly regulated, other countries have sweat shops and unfair labor laws that were just like those in the 1800's and still supply us with our goods. And lastly, during this economic crisis, many companies have looked to the government for support or bail out which in turn, according to some people, would help turn around and fix the economy. Parrallel to that thought support from the government was a major factor in economic growth in the 1800's.
I think the most obvious lesson to be learned from the economic transition in the 1820s-50s is that systems of transportation and communication across the country are vitally important. Without adequate means of communication the economic situations of the different regions of the country become sectional and fall apart. I was surprised that national roads/railways took so long to built, because I think it's pretty much common knowledge that the greatest cities/countries/empires/etc all had excellent transportation (Roman Empire in particular).
Another lesson that is a little bit of a sub-product of the first lesson is that the economies of different areas of the country work best when they work as a whole. When they are divided and contained within their own area, the regions are limited. There is no longer a need for sulf-sufficient-ism. In the 1800s America learned that they needed to make a shift from regionalism to nationalism (ecomically speaking), and America today has already made the shift from Isolationism (self-reliance, individualism) to Globalization. Which is a good thing.
A third lesson is that the government needs to keep up with population growth in order to keep the unemployment rate down by supplying/creating job opportunities. The higher the unemployment rate, the more poor, hungry, angry, potentially riotous people you have with nothing to do. Obv not good. Plus. When people are employed, they contribute something to the economy and make money that they can invest to further boost the national economy.
1. Capital Investment: Between 1820 and 1860, foreign investors as well as domestic ones. They bought into railroads, canals, and textile mills. This provided them with the capital to support projects for internal improvement. Obama similarly has ambitious goals. He wishes to improve healthcare, decrease our oil dependence, offer tax breaks to the poor, and improve schools. All of these require substantial capital, which our country simply does not possess.
2. Government Support- The government on the local, state, and federal levels help to spur on economic growth. Loans were granted for internal improvements. There was also a federal tariff policy necessary to protect domestic goods. Special privileges were also awarded to entrepreneurs. Political and economic leaders can learn from this by offering incentives to people willing to take risks, so long as they are reasonable (not like wild risks that landed us in this economic crisis in the first place). These should be given to loaners and entrepreneurs. Particularly, subsidies should be given to those who loan, since a credit crisis has surfaced.
3. Technology- In the mid 19th century, newer, more efficient ways of producing goods were discovered through innovations. Inventions such as the steam engine or the factory triggered rapid economic growth. Applying this situation to today’s era, we must wane ourselves off of our oil addiction by producing new technologies, perhaps solar power or other additional alternate forms of energy.
Chris brought up a good point earlier, “Our economic system cannot always be on the upswing. There will be times where our economy turns to crap and we need to accept that. It is key however that we dont lose faith in the system and wait out the storm.” People seem to think that this crisis is the end of the world and therefore cause a crisis of confidence. It’s hard to tell nowadays what is affecting what. Is our crisis of confidence plunging our economy down further? Or is it the other way around?
Yeah, i agree with Evan's on the need to use natural resources better. The reason, why Great Britain fell during the United States' economic boom was because they had to rely on other countries for resources. Now that we have used up many of our own we are relying on others for things like oil. The best solution is to find a cleaner energy source which will create more jobs.
During the economic changes of 1820-1850, many lessons were learned that could be applied to todays failing economy.
1) The increase in population in the mid ninteenth century was a major factor to the United States. The population growth provided many more workers which allowed the economy to expand. This can be applied today as there are plenty of people to work but no jobs.
2) This is applicable to the benefits investments had for the country's economy. While in the past investments had helped to create new industries, investments today could undo the recession by creating more jobs in different areas.
3) Lastly, today many jobs are outsourced to other countries. However in the 1800s the Northern states realized the importance of manufacturing goods domestically. This was a significant factor in the success of past economies.
Evan’s comment, “First is the issue with natural resources. One of the largest points of conflict today is our depedence on fossil fuels, which are natural resources,” reminds me of Thomas Friedman’s book, Hot, Flat, and Crowded in which he argues with urgency that our world’s resources simply will not be able to withstand our current consumption rates. A relevant notion he points out is that every economic period of growth usually has environmental consequences and concerns. As Scott Sanders points out in his book, Hunting For Hope, the world will go on without us and the sooner we get that through our thick heads, the more likely we are to change.
I disagree with Chelsea's comment about government intervention and child labor. There are many sweat shops in the United States, you just do not hear about it because the media doesn't want to darken America's reputation. I do agree that sweat shops give the United States cheaper goods, although the means of getting those cheap goods is terrible. I am not so sure about government intervention. I thought people wanted less intervention from the government, which was a part of the democratic view.
Like Alan said, had the housing market not gone out of control the economic crisis the country faces today would not have been as bad. Supply and demand is crucial in having a stable financial system. Due to the high demand for products transportation was improved in the 1800s, however now the supply is greater because no one can afford the products.
Lol rachel for using lit stuff in history. Good call. I agree with Casey's point about the world being connected by globalization. You can look at it both ways. Because of technology, which we still need today, our worlds are connected. You can say that we are, as Chelsea said, a large state that has regions. That is a reason why so many countries were affected by America's financial fiasco.
Also like Rachel and alot of other people have said, technology plays a crucial role in the development of an economy. Technological advancements allow for economic advancements, because industrialization has strong ties to each. As technology improves it makes making and delivering products easier.
STEFANIE SEQUEIRA:
Transformations are constantly taking place in our country that will affect our future. We are also always influenced by the past and lessons they gave us. Our first economic transformation in the 1820s to 50s provided us with several lessons that can be applied to our current economic state as a nation.
1. One lesson is that natural resources plays a large part in the economic state of the country. In the 19th century we had many natural resources that helped our economy grow because we could create more and other countries could invest in us. For example, our abundance of cotton helped our booming textile industry while helping our capital investment. This is because foreign countries like Great Britain want our natural resources, like cotton, that they don't have. Today, our quest for bettering our use of natural resources such as fossil fuels drives our political discussions. Since fossil fuel is depleting we need to find alternate forms of energy. Being pretty dependent on other countries for fuel is currently hurting our economy, while the abundant presence of fuel in countries like Kuwait helps theirs thrive.
2. The second lesson to be carried over is that transportation and technology drives communication and economic growth. Before the 1820s to 50s,transportation was slow and it took a while to transport goods from one place to another. During the thirty years or so, though, new canals, roads, steamboats, and railroads helped link people through land and sea. In effect, commerce thrived and trade speeded up, obviously helping the economy. They also helped spread information faster by delivering letters and such. Today we have inventions like airplanes and cargo ships to speed up trade not only between states but between countries. Without them trade would not be as strong and neither would our economy. In addition, sites like Ebay and Amazon.com further speed up trade between people and email and texting speeds up conversation.
3. The third lesson is that specializing helps the economy. For example, in the 19th century factories were developed on the coast to use steam power and inventions like the cotton gin were brought to America in the south to help farmers pick cotton. The Erie Canal was rightfully created in New York City and the steamboat for the Hudson River because the city was a big center for trade. That still applies today because many large businesses set up in large cities like New York. The greatest technology for farmers is located mostly in the south or other farming states just like technology for sailors and fishermen is located near ports and harbors. The specialization makes it so that new technology will be made of bet use which will help the economy.
STEFANIE SEQUEIRA:
I agree with Alicja's comment that as the economy grows, there has to be a point where the growth diminishes and a type of recession occurs. A couple years ago our economy was thriving and all of a sudden, or so it seemed, the stock market began to drop and people lost their jobs. This also shows another lesson: that when one part of the country fails, so do many more. Most recently, the banks failed for our economy. However, the government did not react quickly enough and failed too, hurting our economy more. Then companies were forced to let people go and the lack of jobs hurt it more. Then companies began closing or downsizing. For example, GM and Chrysler had to cut many of their production sites and stores. As a result, jobs were lost not only from there, but from stores like Good Year tires because not as many cars are being made or bought. It is clear that the spiriling of our economy is a sort of ripple effect.
STEFANIE SEQUEIRA:
Rachel brought up a very good point that "the government on the local, state, and federal levels helps to spur on economic growth. Political and economic leaders can learn from this by offering incentives to people willing to take risks, so long as they are reasonable." I also believe that helping entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs, talented people within a company, can help our country. Intelligent people with new, creative ideas on how to make money need to be employed. There are definitely many out there who just have not had their opportunity yet. If the government can save only a million or so from the many they give to the car companies and instead invest in promising, talented people, I believe our country can actually improve.
There are a lot of lessons learned in the 1850s and 80s that can be applied today in our current economic state.
Infrastructure. In 1850, roads were necessary to transport goods. In 2009 this is still the case. Building roads also creates jobs and an economy cannot function without them.
Politicians say this over and over again, but it's true. We need to stop depending on foreign goods. During the Industrial Revolution the North and South worked together to produce textile goods. The South had slaves who picked the cotton and the North had the factories that turned the cotton into fabric. Together they made our country strong and we did not need to depend on European nations, such as England, as much. In fact, England depended more on us, because they were running out of room to grow their cotton. Today, we need to stop building factories overseas. Everything does not have to be made in China. Things were made here once and we can do it again. We should do it again.
Immigration is, and always will remain, a controversial issue. Immigrants go along with the American ideal of being a melting pot, freedom, equality and whatever else people believe in when they think of America. But more people always equals more competition, for jobs and natural resources such as food and shelter. Back in 1850 immigrants were discriminated against so they were paid less than Americans. That meant that they were more likely to find jobs because employers could have a job completed without having to pay as much. Things are still the same today, in fact, our situation has gotten a lot worse because as immigrants no longer need to cross our borders for people to be outsourced. As for our current economic situation, I don't know if immigration will help our economy right now per se, but if people are losing their jobs one solution is for them to find one overseas and be an immigrant in another country. After all, capitalism, the emerging economic system of the Industrial Revolution, has made the US a more global economy.
After reading through the textbook and discussing in class, what lessons from our first economic transformation in the 1820s to 50s can be applied to our current ecomonic state as a nation? Over the course of the weekend, come up with 3 solid plausible things that applies to this question. Your three ideas will constitute one comment, while you are also to post two additional comments to your classmates' ideas or reactions. Be sure to explain WHY your lessons are worthy of consideration.
We will have a discussion in class on Wednesday about this since you have your exam on Tuesday.
There are many lessons about the economy that could be derived from the time period between the 1820s to the 1850s and applied today.
1) The movement of money helps the economy. After new methods of transportation, like railroads and steam boats, were developed, they led to increased trade as well as agricultural expansion and regional expansion. The new cheaper prices of food allowed more people to spend money on consumer goods. In all, the movement of money helped create more jobs and allowed people to buy more items.
2)The importance of investments. From the late 18th century to the mid 19th century, foreign countries invested millions in US bonds. These money from these investments were used for internal improvements or manufacturing. This promoted further investments from Americans. The government also promoted investments by awarding special privileges to entrepreneurs and passing laws of incorporation. Today, our stock market needs to recover and the government should encourage new investors to put money into it.
3)The people were wary of the social changes that the rapid industriazation could bring. They combatted the threat of change by teaching morals and obedience in schools. This caused messages stressing hard work and diligence. Also, This is similar to today in a different area. Many people are effected by the economic downturn that will cause some social shifts. In effect, new messages that stress thriftiness over extravagance and needs over wants are coming out.
I agree with Kyle when he said that our economy does go through ups and downs. But I don't know if that means our economy will automatically get better. I don't mean to sound pessimistic, but if our economy goes down, there's got to be a reason. Same when the economy goes up. The fact that our economy went down meant that people did not fully understand how our economy works. Either that or they denied that the economy was not going in the direction they wanted it to. If the economy automatically goes up that means that people still don't have an understanding of it, and it will go down again. I don't believe in the "nature" of an economy because the economy is a man made thing. Laws of nature do not apply. People need to figure out how the economy works in order to get it to go up and stay up, which is what the economy is supposed to do. People don't build things for them to break later.
To comment further on what Alan said about Investments:
Yes investments are necessary to promote our economy because they invite people to take risks. The higher the risk, the more rewards people gain. However, the higher the risk the less security, as investments are built on the trust or likelihood that money will be paid back. For example when you go to a bank to borrow a loan, the bank looks at your credit report to get an estimate of how likely you are to pay back the loan. Even if you have a high credit report, that does not mean you will definitely pay back the loan, because something can come up, such as a loss of a job. Right now, and probably for the rest of our country's future, we need to stop going over our heads with high risks, even when the economy is booming. Sure our companies will not grow as big but at the same time we can be certain that they will not fall as deep. Who needs such a big house anyways?
I agree with John that it is and always has been important to produce things domestically and generally that helps our economy. However I think its debatable whether out sourcing ultimately hurts or helps our economy nowadays. Obviously, the American companies here would profit more from producing goods at lower prices but that would make Americans lose jobs. Nevertheless the companies are still expected to make a profit and raise the prices of their bonds whether they outsource or not. Also, if goods weren't outsourced, everything would be more expensive. However its also arguable that if we didn't outsource, we'd have a better economy and more money to buy the more expensive goods.
I agree with Kyle that we should have seen that mass industrialization and production has harmful effects on the environment. The effects of that time period were already very damaging, clogging rivers, disrupting animal life, and polluting the environment with soot. Now with the whole world releasing toxic waste products its effects can be felt globally in occurences like acid rain, damaged animal life, and global warming.
The period of our first economic transformation in the 1820’s to 1850’s can teach us many lessons about our economy today. When our nation was growing economically, many noted of American’s “universal desire to get forward”. I feel like in that time period, the community was more important than individuals. Not to say that people didn’t care about their families or personal welfare, but people back then were more community oriented. In order to survive, they needed the people around them; this promoted unity and selflessness. One of our main problems in this day and age is with selfish/greedy people. Again, I’m not saying that there were not selfish people then but now it is a social norm. Society is only concerned with themselves instead of the improvement of society as a whole. If only individuals cared about themselves in the 1800’s and how they could improve individually while leaving everyone else in the dust, how would the economy have grown? Technological innovations would not have been shared, workers would have sought privileges for themselves only, etc. The US would not improve uniformly.
The effect that factories and modern technologies had on the environment at that time is an extremely important message for us to learn. Even in the 1800’s, the environment was being destroyed; whole forests were cut, pollution was infesting cities, and whole populations of animals were suffering and wiped out. The consequences were detrimental to the environment yet little was done to stop further destruction. The environment today looks nothing like it once was in the 1600’s, 1700’s, or 1800’s. This should be a lesson to us today that we must take care of our environment and limit its destruction because it’s only going to get worse.
I thought that it was interesting that the book mentioned the effect that clocks had on society. During the 1830’s they were mass produced very inexpensively, allowing almost all families to own one. Although clocks allowed people to coordinate their activities and provide schedules for steamboats and railroads, clocks set the new rhythm for American life. Today life year is very fast passed, we are taught to use every minute, every second productively. Over the years the pace has not decreased or leveled off but has increased substantially. When clocks were first introduced they were hated by the workforce. Today the fast paced schedule is equally loathed yet if every clock in America disappeared for even a day, the results would be tremendous.
Alexa brings up a good point about the need for investments in our economy. The economic growth of the 1800's was basically fueled by investments. People were not afraid to invest their money in the new railroad industry or textile mills because they knew that they would grow. Today our stock market is stagnant; people are afraid to invest for fear of losing their money. If there is no input into the economy, then it can't grow.
I agree with Joanna's comment about relying on foreign countries for our goods. As far as what the book says, Americans in the 1800's did not rely on foreign countries for raw materials. They were pretty much self-suffient. Instead they were main exporters; Britian relyed on us for their cotton. I'm sure if we had not supplied Britain with any cotton that their own textile mill revolution could not have been possible. Referring back to Hamilton, our country needs to export more than it imports. By being self-sufficient we can increase job opportunities here and lower the cost of goods.
1. There are similarities that can be seen between investements made during the 1820's-50's and investments made in current times. When the economy first began to boom, investements in business became very popular. Investing money in stocks, and the consequences to those investments, is very similar to that.
2. The dropping of prices is something that could be seen both then and now. When multiple improvements in technology and communication develop at a rapid, this will almost inevitably lead to more competition and therefore prices dropping.
3.Another similarity/lesson that should be acknowledged from the first economic boom is the higher standards of living that result from a growing economy. People become greedy and live out of their means, ultimately resulting in the demise of many families.
Many people have mentioned a parallel in the environmental effects of economic boom. This is so pertinent right now that it's hard to imagine that the problem began way back in the early 1800's. If I'm not mistaken, it was around that time that the destructive effects that industrialization can have on the environment were first discovered. Maybe if something had been done then we wouldn't be in this predicament today...
1. Natural resources are crucial to economic development. In the past, we pursued natural resources such as gold or coal. Today, we need to harness the natural powers to provide energy
2. Urbanization results in job growth and growth of the middle class.
3. Increased transportation and communication drives down the prices of goods and allows for products to be more accessible to the population.
Ally, i couldnt agree more with you. And isnt it crazy after how many years of this destructive behavior that we are just beginning trying to reverse the destructable pattern that in turn would destroy the planet? If people knew pollution was bad back then, then why ws it allowed to continue futher damaging the environment?
In response to Joanna, it is true that people don't build things for them to break later. However, it is difficult to confine a complex system such as the stock market like that. The fact that such a large number of people participate the stock market makes it difficult to control and ensure it is always on the rise.
Rebbeca is correct in stating that by exporting more than we import, we may induce economic growth. However, it is also what we export that determines the state of economy. Exporting consumer goods instead of raw resources leads to greater economic growth, and this was exemplified during the cold war when the U.S. became the main producer of consumer goods and the U.S.S.R was the main exporter of raw resources such as oil. Without the ability to produce finished products, a country can not remain stable no matter how much revenue it brings in.
The three economic examples I believe the early to mid 19th century set that can be utilized today are...
1. Technology creates geographical connections. This can be seen when the steam boats were invented. This allowed people of the South to reach the people of the North, amd vice versa. Through rivers, whether or not they needed to go against the current, the steam boat was used to sail up and down rivers such as the Mississippi.
2. Technology creates competition amongst careers of the same trade. For example, technology allowed accessibility to other products for merchants. This allowed merchants to gain access to products of all sorts and not just those of their usual area of expertise. Though, because each merchant had access to, say cotton a cash crop, each merchant was competing against every other merchant in the area, rather than just the merchants that specialized in a similar trade.
3. Technology can also create immense economical development and success within a nation or area of development. By augmenting technological advancements, more jobs and careers are available for the population. This allows the economy to bloom.
I agree with Alex regarding the lower cost when transportation is facilitated. I think it is intriguing to think about what it would be like if, the "S&H" becomes as low as only a dollar or so with your purchase. Then again, how much can be applied to enhance technology to lower something like shipping and handling? I mean, how long have we been using the airplane for transcontinental shipping? When will it become "more advanced"?
Wow Rachel. HOT, FLAT, AND CROWDED, loved the reference. I compeletely agree. The rate of population growth in the world is out numbering resources. This is also reminds me of Thomas Malthus. He foresaw this effect of population growth almost 2 centuries ago. Imagine what it could be like in another 2 centuries, that is to say, if the resources hold out and suffice the growing population in the next 200 years.
Ahh MEH! That is a very very true statement. Going along with Marriane and Rachel's comments, along with my last comment, the more i think about the current situations are nation is faced with, economically, internationally, and enviormentaly, i get extremely nervous. In other classes and im sure your all aware of the genocide in darfur right? Go with me here. Its considerd another major genocide. Well, after the Holocaust, people said never again and nations promimsed to protect innocent civilians from these types of situations, yet the continue to happen. What im trying to say, is it seems like from all of the readings and global events that have taken place, is that everything repeats itself. Progress doesnt fix the issues that are already prevalent. They knew that dumping chemicals into natural resources and in the air was detrimental, yet it still happens, look at China. Economy problems of today almost mirror those of past generations, except there were new causes such as new innovations in technology.
My three factors that relate the first half of the 19th Century to today's economy are:
1.) The deflation of prices in the economy due to the internal improvements such as transportation and communication. The advances of technology, both then and now, have made communication faster. Competition is more prevalent because there is more communication and transportation. More competition means growth of the economy. Today, with businesses (such as Circuit City) closing down, and others on the edge of not meeting financial means, competition decreases which triggers a rise in price.
2.) Creation of jobs, then and now is an important factor. With internal improvements, more jobs are created making room for investments to help the economy, whether it be in the stock market or bond market.
3.) Natural resources are important as well in creating jobs. Energy wise, we can use natural energy (or nuclear) to help create many jobs. Once again, new jobs created means more investments and economic growth.
I agree with Amy's viewpoint on creating schools, hospitals, etc. to help benefit the growing population. While there may be benefits to creating many new jobs as mentioned above, there has to be public service for the population. During the industrial growth period, the textile mills were popping up which produced textiles and cloth faster than ever suiting the needs of the population, and foreign benefit - they could be used as exports to help trade. The result would be better growth commercially and reputation wise for America.
In Alexa's third point, I like how she addressed the social consequences of economic change. Today, the economic crisis has effected men and women who are in the workforce and lost jobs due to the current situation. As we discussed in class recently, economic changes do cause social changes - even the possibility of an entire new social class. Back in the 19th Century, prior to the industrial revolution, many people were either merchants, shopkeepers, or artisans. However, the textile factories that were built made room for a working class, something new to America that created jobs.
For my third point...
3. The creation of a new social class has consequences due to economic changes. I remember a few days ago in class that we talked about how a new class being created could have a large-scale effect on the community. For the 19th century, factories that were built created a working class, rather than traditional merchants, etc. However, the "pendulum" can swing both ways... Today, the economic bust, (as opposed to boom) been expanding one social class while shrinking the other. For example, the upper class and/or working class has been tremendously effected - layoffs leave one of the highest amount of unemployment ever. So as the working class is decreasing, the lower class is socially growing. At the same time, population is growing - will the economy today be able to support us? Then, it wasn't a worry. With much land left to occupy and modernize, population growth was welcomed. Today, there are worries - with hospitals and schools on the verge of closing, if not closed already, are hindering the quality of life. Even though there are comparisons of both the 19th century and the 21st century, there are also great differences which effect us because of the advancement of technology.
I think Ally and Katie did a good job discussing how "internal improvements" are making the world a "smaller place" which means more competition and lower prices.
Once again, the "pendulum" can swing both ways -- today competition is shrinking which is not good for the consumer. If all the book stores closed except for Barnes & Noble, (hypothetical example only) publishing houses would close because now books are a monopoly from Barnes & Noble, meaning they are the sole supplier of that product. If there is no competition, then expect prices to go up.
Back in the day, (19th century America) with so much room for expansion, the competition was rapidly increasing. How do you think we got to where we are today with banks like Wachovia, WaMu, Chase, Bank of America, and so on. However, our current situation has been showing us that banks buying banks isn't so pretty. Just an example... thoughts?
Lessons:
1. The economy is cyclical. Freaking out over a recession often does nothing and can often make things worse.
2.With improvements in technology comes periods of prosperity. (dotcom bubble)
3. Environmentalism has always played a small part in the economy.
What Alex said about natural resources was a really good connection to both times now and then. For the "energy crisis," it is hard to forget Obama and McCain hounding on "clean coal technology," "nuclear energy," "solar and wind power..." Even though it gets redundant hearing all of this, the "harnessing" of natural resources help create jobs encouraging investments, social changes, which ultimately in the long run lead to an economic growth/boom period.
One more quick thing--
I like what Will said about the dotcom bubble. Many people benefited from this. The internet was created making stocks, email, communication, etc. available world wide at the click of the button. As well, the internet is still criticized as being in its infancy. It will be interesting to see how much it will develop and what we will be able to do twenty or thirty years from now.
I've got to agree with Wilson's take on the whole bank issue. Those are just several of the huge national scale banks that he mentioned and with literally thousands of smaller banks it is easy to see why so many fail. That and the fact that so many were giving out loans to people who really shouldn'ty have been getting them, but thats another story completly.
I also like what Evan said about our dependance on fossil fuels. It is a common ideas that the world has already hit it's peak in terms of fossil fuel production, however we are obviously still using them up at an astounding rate. Research is needed into viable alternative energy sources. I know many people like ethanol but I once heard that to fuel even one million cars it would take a corn field that took up 97% of the United States, so that isn't really the most realistic of options.
Post a Comment