[rt]

There are two lectures on this period of time by Dr. Woods. One is about Coolidge and Harding and the other about the 1920s. They should answer your questions.

[rt]

Why don’t you check out the lectures in the U.S. History Course since 1877? There’s a lecture on Eisenhower by Dr. Woods and a lecture on Reagan by Dr. Gutzman!

[rt]

Thanks for all the answers. There’s just the thing about the population growth etc. I’ve got to get my mind across. So:
The innovations during the Agricultural Revolution increased productivity, This led to higher output and more people could be fed which caused the population to grow.
In turn more labor was available in the agricultural sector and fewer workers were needed to produce food for everyone. Usually higher productivity leads to higher wages but the additional labor now available in the agricultural sector put downward pressure on wages. On Wikipedia it says:
“New agricultural implements were invented at an increasing pace all through the 1800s allowing agricultural populations in Britain to actually decrease.” (1)

While society as a whole benefited dramatically from these innovations, some farmers whose work became obsolete did not. This phenomenon is called Creative Destruction.

The accumulation of capital and the labor freed up during the agricultural revolution led to the Industrial Revolution and the construction of factories. No one forced the people to move to the cities. Instead, they were offered a new option. They could have pursued work on the fields or some other place but a lot of them chose to work in the industry where salaries were higher.

Is this correct?

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Agricultural_Revolution

[rt]

I understand, thanks so much!
I’ve been doing some research on this subject and would like to write here what I’m going to tell my teacher:

“During the Agricultural Revolution efficiency increased because of new farming techniques. Due to higher productivity, output increased which caused the population to grow and labor to be freed up. The additional work force could in turn be put into manufacturing. The combination of an increase in population, new available labor and the accumulation of capital led the stage for the Industrial Revolution.

Capitalism is primarily about mass production for mass consumption. In order to make a profit a company needs to sell cheaper products than their competitors. Thus a company tries to reduce production costs, increase productivity and lower the prices of its products. As a consequence, demand for their goods increase and their profits increase. A company wants to sell their products to the masses (workers, bourgeoisie…). This is what happened during the 19th century. Competition and increased productivity (due to capital accumulation) put downward pressure on prices. As a result prices decreased during the 19th century. Simultaneously wages increased because the output per worker increased!

It’s important to know that no entrepreneur could compel people to work in their factories. Workers were offered wages and voluntarily agreed to sell their labor for a particular salary. If they had thought they could have lived a better life working on the fields or doing other things they could have chosen to do so. Lots of workers chose work in the factories because the wages they could obtain in the industrial sector were higher than in the agricultural sector.

Child labor did not begin in the Industrial Revolution but had been present for most of human history. Child labor only ended when parents could afford to pay for their children’s education. A government cannot just create wealth or bring prosperity by passing laws. If the governments had burdened the businesses with regulations and taxes, these workers wouldn’t have been hired in the first place. If the governments had prevented children from working they would have starved or turned to prostitution. If life were so easy, Third World countries only had to pass laws improving the working conditions, ending child labor, introducing a minimum wage and so on… There’s only one solution to poverty, free market capitalism!

Let’s compare the countries that have undergone an Industrial Revolution to those who haven’t! The countries that implemented free market reforms and had an Industrial Revolution are today among the most prosperous and freest on the globe (U.S.A, Western Europe, Japan…). Furthermore the Industrial Revolution marked the end of famines in Europe (in peace time).
However, those countries that did not embrace the free market are among the poorest on the globe.

Although some new products like cars etc. weren’t immediately affordable to everyone in the 19th century they got cheaper over time. This is the nature of the free market. Products become cheaper and their quality improves. That’s the reason, even poorer people in the western world have better access to health care, food and other products than the kings in pre-industrial Europe.”

I welcome your criticism and/or other ideas.

[rt]

Hi,
Under The Wilson administration the income tax was instituted and the Federal Reserve System was founded. These were very important changes because it allowed the Federal Government to tax people’s income.
Through the Fed the government can inflate the money supply. Since the foundation of the Fed the dollar lost about 97% of its purchasing power.
Through inflation and the lowering of the interest rates the central bank (i.e. the Fed) is responsible for the boom bust cycles. Hence the Fed caused the Great Depression and the financial crisis of 2008.
Andrew Napolitano has a book coming out later this year on the progressive era:
http://www.amazon.com/Theodore-Woodrow-Presidents-Destroyed-Constitutional/dp/1595553517/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&qid=1335711069&sr=8-11

[rt]

Oh sorry Dr. J I did not know you’ve already mentioned Hoppe. Here’s an interview with Hans-Hermann Hoppe on the Lew Rockwell Show:

[rt]

Thanks for the replies. I’ll do a little bit of research on this topic and keep you up to date.

However I’ve got another question. I’ve heard a couple of times the argument of proponents of the industrial revolution that people voluntarily decided to move from the fields into the factories. Apparently they favored factory work to that on the fields. Thus this proves that the workers benefited from the industrial revolution.

But I’ve also heard the argument that because of the extreme population growth (caused by the agricultural revolution) there wasn’t enough work to be done in the agricultural sector. Hence, the only work to be found was in the industrial sector. I remember having read that without the industrial revolution a lot of these people would have starved, as was the case in India (where there wasn’t an industrial revolution). Could you elaborate on that? Thanks!

[rt]

Hi if you’re interested in a book ‘exposing’ the negative side of democracy, I’d recommend ‘Democracy The God That Failed’ by Hans-Hermann Hoppe. It is good food for thought, I believe!

[rt]

In this case I would define stealing as chasing the indian tribes out of a particular territory or killing them in order to acquire their land.

[Author]

Posts