Forum Replies Created

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • Author
  • in reply to: Predatory Pricing #15788

    I think I found my answer (please let me know how right or wrong I am);

    The Panic of 1873 (which was caused by the burst of the government created Railroad Bubble) caused a depression that freaked everyone out. During that time political and social movements gained influence in opposition to the rooted corporatism responsible for the bubble – Communism, socialism, populism, anarchy and progressivism.


    Thanks for the response John, I am a big fan of “Economics in One Lesson” and share your understanding. I’m curious if there is an article that basically says, “The tariff did not assist in the American Industrial Revolution because…”

    in reply to: Predatory Pricing #15787

    Nice thread.

    I have a burning, and simple, question:

    If there is no evidence of predatory pricing by a company in American history… where did Anti-Trust legislation get its support? (I’ve read Woods 33 questions and IPC Guide to US History)

    What companies did what to offend the public and government to the point that considerable time and effort was used to harass and break apart companies?

    I find it difficult to believe the government did it just because or just for votes. Some specific things must have set off the crusade.

    I am currently teaching a high school US history course and want to properly explain the motivation behind the laws.


    Thank you for that detail. My Madison quote is completely out of context as well. In #39 he goes back and forth pointing out which elements are national and which are federal. I threw it together real quick and I’ll clean up the details for a real lesson, but for interview purposes I think it went well.


    Here is my presentation, made with

    If interested – Go to full screen mode and click your way through.

    There is a guiding worksheet with more questions and the research project but I cannot attach it.

    Mr. Gutzman, you make a cameo! Thank you for the advice by the way, I will incorporate the debate in a future lesson.

    in reply to: Reagan and Eisenhower Administrations #15646

    That explains things better. Thank you.

    in reply to: Reagan and Eisenhower Administrations #15644

    I am disappointed that you simply generalized and wrote off my view as generic and anti-government. I was anticipating further evidence, articles and suggested reading that support your conclusion.
    My desire, regarding the Liberty Classroom, is to expose myself to new content, broaden my understanding of other view points, and enrich the material I use in my classroom.

    in reply to: The rise and fall of ancient empires #16360

    I have a degree in classical archaeology and the history I studied was obsessed with invasions and politics. But as is the case with many tales of history, monetary policy is sidelined. I guess pondering the long term affects of lead poisoning from aqueducts is more stimulating.

    After college I am now able to dictate my own education and I enjoy learning about the role of currency manipulation and inflation in the Roman Empire and considering parallels to the United States.

    The Mises Institute provides Joseph Peden’s lecture on “Inflation and the Fall of the Roman Empire” for free.

    The Cato Journal published an article by Bruce Bartlett titled, “How Excessive Government Killed Ancient Rome.”

    And lastly, Ludwig von Mises discusses this topic in lecture six of his “Thoughts for Today and Tomorrow”

    in reply to: Woodrow Wilson's Domestic Policy #15625

    Wow Brion McClanahan , great reply! Getting my subscriptions worth right there. Michael bring up a great point about the 17th, it paralyzed federalism.

    Wilson did oppose women’s suffrage for most of his administration.

    A mix of domestic/foreign policy: Wilson (With Henry Stimson pulling his strings) drafted over 2 1/2 million from the labor force and into the military.

    in reply to: The 1920's for the Common Man. #15662

    I am a teacher, and I do not use the supplied textbook. The text is perverted history in which many interest groups, including the government, have warped history to further their agenda.

    Public sector unions are a major interest group that has shaped history through the creation of mandatory teaching standards. Often they will whine that the text it too anti-union. Here is an example:

    This being said, there is this belief that unions created the middle class are to thank for all of our prosperity, and the fall of the union is the end of the middle class.

    In reality, mass production brought down costs and prices. Purchasing power increased. Ford’s employees saw some of the greatest wage increases, shorter work days and two day weekend largely in his attempt to avoid unionization.

    You’re right, the wealth of the common man is relative. By toady’s standards, poorer, compared to the farmers and miners of the late 19th century, richer. Today our standard of comfortable living is high, think of our monthly bills and staple luxuries:

    Phone (with internet)
    College tuition
    Large mortgages
    Car payments
    Gym membership
    Cottages, lake house, hunting cabins
    Eating out
    Medical Insurance
    Car Insurance
    Government services
    and most of all… online learning classrooms : )

    It is difficult to secure the finances of the modern middle class lifestyle.

    in reply to: Reagan and Eisenhower Administrations #15642

    Kevin Gutzman, I am still not convinced bolstering US military spending by $800 billion was a key component to the fall of the Soviet Union. Yes Bessmertnykh credits the method as an accelerator but basic economics demonstrates that the soviet interpretation of communism was doomed to fail whether or not the United States behaved as a competing super power.

    Unfortunately I am working purely on my understanding of basic economic systems and not basing my argument on a well researched and published case study.

    in reply to: Broken Window Less Fallacious? #15667

    The US witnessed a wonderful economic boom after WWII. The key factor being that the government eased economic restrictions, controls and rations. Businesses got to shift from products of war and destruction to capital goods and consumables of value. No longer were tax dollars wasted on war supplies, that money was now part of exchange in the market place. In addition, the return of soldiers provided more labor. When land, labor and capital increase economies expand.

    Many people credit the destruction of Europe and east Asia as an opportunity for American business to increase exports and boost the economy. It helped considerably, but it was a bubble. Once the battered regions redeveloped the bubble burst. The FED and the US Government, not wanting to admit this, began their path of artificially low interest rates and attempts to prop up the deflating sectors.

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)