• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Gilded Age lead to and cause the Great Depression of 1929a

Rich123

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
Messages
754
Reaction score
198
Jason T Eastman Assistant professor of Sociology at the Coastal Carolina University Says the Great Depression of 1929 was a direct consequence of the Gilded Age and it's Laissez Faire Policies.
The Gilded age which followed the Civil War with it's westward expansion,increased immigration and industrialization was a period of time which saw many industrial advances and people like Carnegie,Mellon,Morgan ,Vanderbilt and J.D. Rockerfeller all took advantage of those advances and all amassed huge fortunes for their time. But their good fortunes was at the expense of the greater social good. The term Gilded Age was named by Mark Twain who saw it as a time with a thin veneer of glittering Gold covering the deep seeded ugliness underneath. While the above lived lavished life styles the working class that they employed lived lives of absolute desperation and misery. Children were often employed as well and worked long hours in very dangerous conditions. Because they were the smallest in stature in the Coal Mines they were often used to crawl into places where adults couldn't fit. Aside from the horrible conditions that the masses found themselves in, the concentration of wealth became very corrosive politically with the object of rigging the system, so that those well placed people could profit even more and avoid culpability for their crimes.

A notable example concerned Jay Gould a Rail Road Baron of the time. Jay Gould use his political connections to create inflation by manipulating the availability of Gold, which then forced commodities traders to import goods like wheat from western countries in order to increase those supplies. The importation of those goods then cost inordinate rates on Gould's trains. This actually caused the Black Friday Stock Market Crash of 1869.Eventually the Grant administration stopped the practice but Gould was never charged. This type of dealing was common place as robber barons exerted their oligopolistic control of the economy to maximize their gains.

There was some push back in the early 1900 but the great world war and the roaring 20s largely left the situation ignored. The Gilded Age says Professor Eastman not only lasted until the Great Depression of 1929 but the inequality and corrosive economic practices of the age largely caused the depression. During WW1 large amount of capital flowed from small investors, many of whom bought on margin. Margin is borrowing the money to invest in the market. Financiers then used other peoples borrowed money enhance their own investments by taking advantage of the inflated prices that came from over demand. But on Black Thursday 1929 it was obvious that the inflated value of the stock could no longer be maintained and then the market crashed.

The subsequent run on the banks meant that people who di not even gamble in the stock market on Wall Street lost their savings Then Businesses failed due to lack of demand. And lack of capital and credit lead to economic stagnation.

Today we see some correlations with the extreme concentration of wealth into the hands of a few and the relaxing of economic controls by politicians at the request of their corporate masters . Some of the major differences are that under Hoover nothing was done the Robber Barons of today used their influence to force their tools in congress to pass legislation that ultimately allowed them to (Privatize their profits while Socializing their losses) in the form of bail outs. It seems that these social conservative only hate Socialism when it benefits the poor. Yet it is the poor who are the real producers of wealth through their labor. So for those who are so afraid of working people getting a break, why are you not afraid of Rich people who force our government to SOCIALIZE THEIR LOSSES VIA BAIL OUTS BUT INSIST ON PRIVATIZING THEIR PROFITS?
 
Last edited:
IF the nation survives long enuff, I predict the masses of poor will eventually declare war on the rich ............ similar to 1917 Russia .............
 
The intelligentsia has failed.

Do we intend to fix the problem?

There are huge consequences to not fixing the problem.
 
Jason T Eastman Assistant professor of Sociology at the Coastal Carolina University Says the Great Depression of 1929 was a direct consequence of the Gilded Age and it's Laissez Faire Policies.
The Gilded age which followed the Civil War with it's westward expansion,increased immigration and industrialization was a period of time which saw many industrial advances and people like Carnegie,Mellon,Morgan ,Vanderbilt and J.D. Rockerfeller all took advantage of those advances and all amassed huge fortunes for their time. But their good fortunes was at the expense of the greater social good. The term Gilded Age was named by Mark Twain who saw it as a time with a thin veneer of glittering Gold covering the deep seeded ugliness underneath. While the above lived lavished life styles the working class that they employed lived lives of absolute desperation and misery. Children were often employed as well and worked long hours in very dangerous conditions. Because they were the smallest in stature in the Coal Mines they were often used to crawl into places where adults couldn't fit. Aside from the horrible conditions that the masses found themselves in, the concentration of wealth became very corrosive politically with the object of rigging the system, so that those well placed people could profit even more and avoid culpability for their crimes.

A notable example concerned Jay Gould a Rail Road Baron of the time. Jay Gould use his political connections to create inflation by manipulating the availability of Gold, which then forced commodities traders to import goods like wheat from western countries in order to increase those supplies. The importation of those goods then cost inordinate rates on Gould's trains. This actually caused the Black Friday Stock Market Crash of 1869.Eventually the Grant administration stopped the practice but Gould was never charged. This type of dealing was common place as robber barons exerted their oligopolistic control of the economy to maximize their gains.

There was some push back in the early 1900 but the great world war and the roaring 20s largely left the situation ignored. The Gilded Age says Professor Eastman not only lasted until the Great Depression of 1929 but the inequality and corrosive economic practices of the age largely caused the depression. During WW1 large amount of capital flowed from small investors, many of whom bought on margin. Margin is borrowing the money to invest in the market. Financiers then used other peoples borrowed money enhance their own investments by taking advantage of the inflated prices that came from over demand. But on Black Thursday 1929 it was obvious that the inflated value of the stock could no longer be maintained and then the market crashed.

The subsequent run on the banks meant that people who di not even gamble in the stock market on Wall Street lost their savings Then Businesses failed due to lack of demand. And lack of capital and credit lead to economic stagnation.

Today we see some correlations with the extreme concentration of wealth into the hands of a few and the relaxing of economic controls by politicians at the request of their corporate masters . Some of the major differences are that under Hoover nothing was done the Robber Barons of today used their influence to force their tools in congress to pass legislation that ultimately allowed them to (Privatize their profits while Socializing their losses) in the form of bail outs. It seems that these social conservative only hate Socialism when it benefits the poor. Yet it is the poor who are the real producers of wealth through their labor. So for those who are so afraid of working people getting a break, why are you not afraid of Rich people who force our government to SOCIALIZE THEIR LOSSES VIA BAIL OUTS BUT INSIST ON PRIVATIZING THEIR PROFITS?

I remember that line of argument from old communists. It does have a pleasant ring about it to the suppressed. It stokes righteous anger and tickles their bellies at the same time. Bestows that wonderful illusion of dignitas.

Alas, it is muddled and economics tells a different story. Bubbles build on liquidity and fiscal largesse combined with irrational exuberance. They tend to burst, that much is true. But is often, when your barber tells you he has borrowed to make a killing, you have found one of the villains.

;)
 
The intelligentsia has failed.

Do we intend to fix the problem?

There are huge consequences to not fixing the problem.

The medicine is not popular. People like social programs, want the feeling of everyone being forced to buy insurance public schools instead of making the decision to spend oneself. People are funny and do funny things.
 
IF the nation survives long enuff, I predict the masses of poor will eventually declare war on the rich ............ similar to 1917 Russia .............

There are presently (practically) no poor in the US other than voluntary ones. It’s people that feel poor, because they were told they deserve more. Envy is a motivator for violence. And that stoking that is squarely on Sander’s door Step.
 
IF the nation survives long enuff, I predict the masses of poor will eventually declare war on the rich ............ similar to 1917 Russia .............

Russian citizens never had the same economic and social prospects of Americans.

There is no comparison.
 
There are presently (practically) no poor in the US other than voluntary ones. It’s people that feel poor, because they were told they deserve more. Envy is a motivator for violence. And that stoking that is squarely on Sander’s door Step.

I suggest you take a drive through Appalachia. There are plenty of poor folks in the US. And, no. They are not all volunteers.
 
Jason T Eastman Assistant professor of Sociology at the Coastal Carolina University Says the Great Depression of 1929 was a direct consequence of the Gilded Age and it's Laissez Faire Policies.
The Gilded age which followed the Civil War with it's westward expansion,increased immigration and industrialization was a period of time which saw many industrial advances and people like Carnegie,Mellon,Morgan ,Vanderbilt and J.D. Rockerfeller all took advantage of those advances and all amassed huge fortunes for their time. But their good fortunes was at the expense of the greater social good. The term Gilded Age was named by Mark Twain who saw it as a time with a thin veneer of glittering Gold covering the deep seeded ugliness underneath. While the above lived lavished life styles the working class that they employed lived lives of absolute desperation and misery. Children were often employed as well and worked long hours in very dangerous conditions. Because they were the smallest in stature in the Coal Mines they were often used to crawl into places where adults couldn't fit. Aside from the horrible conditions that the masses found themselves in, the concentration of wealth became very corrosive politically with the object of rigging the system, so that those well placed people could profit even more and avoid culpability for their crimes.

A notable example concerned Jay Gould a Rail Road Baron of the time. Jay Gould use his political connections to create inflation by manipulating the availability of Gold, which then forced commodities traders to import goods like wheat from western countries in order to increase those supplies. The importation of those goods then cost inordinate rates on Gould's trains. This actually caused the Black Friday Stock Market Crash of 1869.Eventually the Grant administration stopped the practice but Gould was never charged. This type of dealing was common place as robber barons exerted their oligopolistic control of the economy to maximize their gains.

There was some push back in the early 1900 but the great world war and the roaring 20s largely left the situation ignored. The Gilded Age says Professor Eastman not only lasted until the Great Depression of 1929 but the inequality and corrosive economic practices of the age largely caused the depression. During WW1 large amount of capital flowed from small investors, many of whom bought on margin. Margin is borrowing the money to invest in the market. Financiers then used other peoples borrowed money enhance their own investments by taking advantage of the inflated prices that came from over demand. But on Black Thursday 1929 it was obvious that the inflated value of the stock could no longer be maintained and then the market crashed.

The subsequent run on the banks meant that people who di not even gamble in the stock market on Wall Street lost their savings Then Businesses failed due to lack of demand. And lack of capital and credit lead to economic stagnation.

Today we see some correlations with the extreme concentration of wealth into the hands of a few and the relaxing of economic controls by politicians at the request of their corporate masters . Some of the major differences are that under Hoover nothing was done the Robber Barons of today used their influence to force their tools in congress to pass legislation that ultimately allowed them to (Privatize their profits while Socializing their losses) in the form of bail outs. It seems that these social conservative only hate Socialism when it benefits the poor. Yet it is the poor who are the real producers of wealth through their labor. So for those who are so afraid of working people getting a break, why are you not afraid of Rich people who force our government to SOCIALIZE THEIR LOSSES VIA BAIL OUTS BUT INSIST ON PRIVATIZING THEIR PROFITS?

The choice is not a binary one.

There can be capitalism supported intelligent regulation. There does not need to be an utter lack of regulation OR a strangling, constricting web of red tape.

Regarding the part highlighted in RED, this is absolutely rubbish.

The labor of anyone is just labor. I can dig a ditch and create nothing but a ditch. I can tighten a bolt and create nothing at all. In truth, I may damage both the bolt and the nut with my effort. I might cut a power line digging the ditch.

Labor creates nothing by itself. It is the organized, wise coordination of and direction of labor by a leader with vision that turns that labor into wealth.

In the examples above of the ditch or the bolt, the labor could actually be causing damage that is only corrected at a cost. This is the opposite of wealth creation.

Labor is only labor.
 
I suggest you take a drive through Appalachia. There are plenty of poor folks in the US. And, no. They are not all volunteers.

All they need do is move to where the jobs are. If you opt to live in the dirt it is not poverty. It is your chosen way of life.
 
All they need do is move to where the jobs are. If you opt to live in the dirt it is not poverty. It is your chosen way of life.

It takes brains to organize a big move. It takes ambition to actually pull it off. People born without either are not doing so by choice.
 
IF the nation survives long enuff, I predict the masses of poor will eventually declare war on the rich ............ similar to 1917 Russia .............

Or we can opt out. Check out what a (B corporation is) . In addition there are cooperatives happening all across America. Look what the Amish ,the Mennonites and many others can do all on their own. This is not to say we need any religious orthodoxy . But people need to come together. We are starting to. Like I said cooperatives are springing up. Buy Local is another good sign. But I think it's important to note that the workers of the world are the producers of wealth. The rich are the munipulators of wealth. Bartering takes the rich out of the picture. There are many ways to transfer the wealth we create without those blood suckers being involved.
 
The intelligentsia has failed.

Do we intend to fix the problem?

There are huge consequences to not fixing the problem.

Please explain what you are attempting to say. I fail to see your point. I apologize.
 
I remember that line of argument from old communists. It does have a pleasant ring about it to the suppressed. It stokes righteous anger and tickles their bellies at the same time. Bestows that wonderful illusion of dignitas.

Alas, it is muddled and economics tells a different story. Bubbles build on liquidity and fiscal largesse combined with irrational exuberance. They tend to burst, that much is true. But is often, when your barber tells you he has borrowed to make a killing, you have found one of the villains.

;)

Yes part of the problem was small investors buying on Margin. But surely you have heard of MARKET MAKERS. If I had a million dollars to waist because there is a lot more where that came from. And I didn't really care about who I might hurt so long as I could take advantage of some potential upside. I would find a stock that was way under priced and buy it up. This would undoubtably get the attention of less informed investors who would want to capitalize on what looked like a rising star. I would sit back and wait until those investors bought the stock up and then sell my shares. If I bought a million shares at a dollar a share and sold it when it was at when it got to fifty dollars a share I made 49 million dollars but those other investors are likely to take a beating because they bought on margin and have to pay their debtor back.

This is totally unethical of course but what's ethics got to do with business? Don't forget not too long ago tobacco company C.E.O.s manipulated the nicotine levels in cigarettes in order to keep people addicted as their own internal documents proved. This was well after it was accepted science that said smoking caused cancer. Those C.E.O.s didn't care about the pain and suffering and ultimate deaths of their TARGETS, they just want to make a little money. That's the American way. They are still at it in America but more so in third world countries. If one can't find the immorality in that, then maybe it's time for Americans to forge their own futures.
 
Please explain what you are attempting to say. I fail to see your point. I apologize.

America is in the ditch deposited here by our leaders, we need better leaders, not getting better leaders carries grave consequences.
 
The intelligentsia has failed.

Do we intend to fix the problem?

There are huge consequences to not fixing the problem.

I think I'm understanding your reply better now. Yes I would say that the intelligentsia has failed to the extent that many Americans are either unaware or unconcerned about where this country has been and could be returning to. Is that what you were thinking about?
 
There are presently (practically) no poor in the US other than voluntary ones. It’s people that feel poor, because they were told they deserve more. Envy is a motivator for violence. And that stoking that is squarely on Sander’s door Step.

Negative about the poor and they don't choose to be poor. But this is also about the working class who should be just as entitled to the fruits of their labor as a fat cat who can buy special favors from his favorite representative.
 
I think I'm understanding your reply better now. Yes I would say that the intelligentsia has failed to the extent that many Americans are either unaware or unconcerned about where this country has been and could be returning to. Is that what you were thinking about?

I am talking about the so-called best of the best either not knowing or not caring what right is, about the most expert of the so-called expert either not knowing or not caring what right is, and I condemn the most......by far......those who do know but who dont say anything because they know that if they do their fellow failed intelligentsia members would shut down the gravy train in retaliation for the crime not conforming to the established game plan, which is so much more important than truth to these assholes...for rocking the boat............this taking on water headed for the rocky shallows because the leadership sucks boat, with most everyone onboard either too stupid or too lazy to care about what is coming.

Hopefully you get it this time, as you are a lot of work.

I am going to try to remember.
 
Last edited:
Russian citizens never had the same economic and social prospects of Americans.

There is no comparison.

Well I agree (retiredUSN) that there were significant differences between the two countries and the workers of those countries. But when you get ten year old children working in Coal Mines and northern Canneries then I would say the dire circumstances were very similar for both those periods of history . I don't speak of the Gilded age as a reference to our current working situation. I bring up that period of American History to demonstrate how corporate giants regarded their responsibility to their work force and it was that total lack of concern for their workers well being that made it necessary for reforms . I also wanted to demonstrate that it's not only the workers who ask for the government to intervene on their behalf, as with the bail outs. Our economy is not pure capitalism and Socialistic economies are not pure socialism. Putin's so called Communism is a far cry from that too. As you can see from recent times our C.E.O.s are the last ones who would want pure Capitalism because they always run to the government when they want bail outs. Hoover thought that the economy had to right itself and we see that things only got worse as a result of his non intervention. The government does have a job to do but We the People are always an after thought in order to sell their give a ways to the rich. Why do the Koch brothers feel the need to spend $15,000,000.00 to sell the G.O.P tax bill to the public if as Donald Trump says it doesn't benefit the rich? Ya there are some average folk who will benefit but many will be hurt by it. But that not even the point. The point is, it was never about us. It was to appease the donors and their corporate special interest. They tacked on the goodies for a few to make it more acceptable to the voters. But we only became visible to them after they figured out how to benefit their rich friends. That's what's wrong with America. "Of the People, By the People and For the People." Sounds pretty.
 
The choice is not a binary one.

There can be capitalism supported intelligent regulation. There does not need to be an utter lack of regulation OR a strangling, constricting web of red tape.

Regarding the part highlighted in RED, this is absolutely rubbish.

The labor of anyone is just labor. I can dig a ditch and create nothing but a ditch. I can tighten a bolt and create nothing at all. In truth, I may damage both the bolt and the nut with my effort. I might cut a power line digging the ditch.

Labor creates nothing by itself. It is the organized, wise coordination of and direction of labor by a leader with vision that turns that labor into wealth.

In the examples above of the ditch or the bolt, the labor could actually be causing damage that is only corrected at a cost. This is the opposite of wealth creation.

Labor is only labor.

Your examples are well noted. I should restate that to include, Labor which produces a finished product . Would that be more acceptable to you? The point is, John D. Rockerfeller didn't know the oil business, he was a banker. He hired those who knew something about the business. When I refer to labor I mean it in the general scope of those who produce as in those individuals who J D R would have hired. So in this scenario he J.D. R. did not produce the actual product. It was the efforts of those who he hired which actually produced the desired results. It was they who produced wealth via their efforts. True their efforts needed structure and organization but in any group of people a task leader will emerge if the task is well defined. This is a basic aspect of social psychology. So the only other ingredient needed is funding and we see by the Obama and Sanders example that the people are quite capable of that.
 
Your examples are well noted. I should restate that to include, Labor which produces a finished product . Would that be more acceptable to you? The point is, John D. Rockerfeller didn't know the oil business, he was a banker. He hired those who knew something about the business. When I refer to labor I mean it in the general scope of those who produce as in those individuals who J D R would have hired. So in this scenario he J.D. R. did not produce the actual product. It was the efforts of those who he hired which actually produced the desired results. It was they who produced wealth via their efforts. True their efforts needed structure and organization but in any group of people a task leader will emerge if the task is well defined. This is a basic aspect of social psychology. So the only other ingredient needed is funding and we see by the Obama and Sanders example that the people are quite capable of that.

I don't understand the reference highlighted in red. What for profit enterprise have Obama and Sanders created?

Funding is the first ingredient, not the only other ingredient. JDR hired the laborers. They were selling a product, their time and effort, and he was buying that product.

Just like he had previously bought land or the right to use it, machinery, licenses and so forth, he bought their labor.

The visionary fulfills his vision and proceeds. The rest of us go along for the ride.

Government creates the environment in which he acts and the rest of us are blessed to have access to some of the fruits of that vision.

In the US, we have a good life. In Africa, the life is not so good for the average guy.

What is the difference? In both places, many people people work like whipped mules and finish the day exhausted.

In Africa, the economies are not so great. In the US, it's the best anywhere, ever.

In America, we follow the dual tracks of capitalism and socialism. There is a generally accepted drive toward a vision of "the better" involving the combined efforts of Government, business and people.

We cannot effectively divide out the various components of the economy and our success any more than we dissect our bodies saying that the brain is the only thing that works or the hands or the eyes.

In concert the symphony relies on the conductor as well as the musicians and the producers and the traditions and writers of the music. Take out one component and the music ends.

All of that said, though, labor is only labor. Essential and noble for those lucky enough to find a fulfilling outlet. In its best examples, "Work is love made visible"- Gibran.
 
Just keep the lemmings supplied with new iPhones, reality TV and celebrity worship and they'll sell their souls to the country on the cheap. There will never be a revolution because people's universes end at their fingertips now. It's a combination of selfishness, apathy and laziness.
 
I don't understand the reference highlighted in red. What for profit enterprise have Obama and Sanders created?

Funding is the first ingredient, not the only other ingredient. JDR hired the laborers. They were selling a product, their time and effort, and he was buying that product.

Just like he had previously bought land or the right to use it, machinery, licenses and so forth, he bought their labor.

The visionary fulfills his vision and proceeds. The rest of us go along for the ride.

Government creates the environment in which he acts and the rest of us are blessed to have access to some of the fruits of that vision.

In the US, we have a good life. In Africa, the life is not so good for the average guy.

What is the difference? In both places, many people people work like whipped mules and finish the day exhausted.

In Africa, the economies are not so great. In the US, it's the best anywhere, ever.

In America, we follow the dual tracks of capitalism and socialism. There is a generally accepted drive toward a vision of "the better" involving the combined efforts of Government, business and people.

We cannot effectively divide out the various components of the economy and our success any more than we dissect our bodies saying that the brain is the only thing that works or the hands or the eyes.

In concert the symphony relies on the conductor as well as the musicians and the producers and the traditions and writers of the music. Take out one component and the music ends.

All of that said, though, labor is only labor. Essential and noble for those lucky enough to find a fulfilling outlet. In its best examples, "Work is love made visible"- Gibran.

The reference to Sanders and obama was made because their campaigns was largely financed by small donors. Thus as I pointed out previously in any groupd of people there exist leaders and followers who are dormant at that particular time. But when a well defined task is at hand there will emerge from those in that groupd people who will take charge as in a (Task Leader) . That is to say, if a bridge needed to be build and if it was up to only those people in that group that had to accomplish the task, there will be people who will take charge as to how much concret ,how much steel and what kinds of equipment that would be necessary to complete the job. There will be others who will know how to enlist others for financial funding. Then their will be others who would follow the instructions of those who are task leaders. This is the basic dynamics of Social interaction and is widely accepted in Sociology and social psychology as factual. When I was in college our professor had groups of us picked at random and given a task to complete .Sure enough there were some who emerged to take charge of the given task. Finally as I pointed out both Sanders and Obama was funded mostly by small donors, and it will be they who will step up and make something important happen, without the Rockerfellers or Vanderbilts.

I will also take issue with your assertion that we have the best economy in the world. I would submit to you that there are times when our economy is working very well but it didn't work so good in 1929, or 1869, or 2008 just to name a few of our down turns. I would say all economies go through similar periods.
 
America is in the ditch deposited here by our leaders, we need better leaders, not getting better leaders carries grave consequences.

Yes you are right on the money with that statement. I think America needs to be a country of people who take charge of their own futures. If a corporation is acting unethically why would we buy from them? On the other hand if we know of a corporation who is acting socially and environmentally responsible and they nedd to charge a little more for their product ,because they don't polute and they actually care about their work force, would we be willing to pay the extra? Small steps, multiplied by many equals great distances.
 
Yes you are right on the money with that statement. I think America needs to be a country of people who take charge of their own futures. If a corporation is acting unethically why would we buy from them? On the other hand if we know of a corporation who is acting socially and environmentally responsible and they nedd to charge a little more for their product ,because they don't polute and they actually care about their work force, would we be willing to pay the extra? Small steps, multiplied by many equals great distances.

We need to decide what we want that is the most important, both to us and our kids, we have to figure out where America needs work/fixing and then go do that, we need to stop being little children demanding that we get everything we want and not willing to do much work to get it.

We need to grow up.

FAST
 
Back
Top Bottom