Great Depression

I do not believe that failure of the free market caused the Great Depression. President Hoover was the President when the Great Depression started and he was not a practitioner of a free market economy as the Smoot-Hawley act proves. The ‘high-wage’ policy of the Hoover administration and the trade unions succeeded only in pricing workers out of the labor market, generating an increasing circle of unemployment.” Hoover signed the Revenue Act of 1932. The largest tax increase in peacetime history, it doubled the income tax. Can any serious scholar observe the Hoover administration’s massive economic intervention and, with a straight face, pronounce the inevitably deleterious effects as the fault of free markets?

 I do not think government intervention is what helped us out of the economy.  Some economists have estimated that the NRA boosted the cost of doing business by an average of 40 percent. Roosevelt helped some get jobs but it was his wasteful spending and other meddling that kept people out of jobs and the Depression prolonged. The genesis of the Great Depression lay in the irresponsible monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government in the late 1920s and early 1930s.

Lesson 6 Essay

If I were to create my own city, it probably wouldn’t last very long. I would try to have a few things keep the economic prosperity alive such as making sure everyone has their property rights. As we talked about in class, the scripture in D&C says that “We believe that no government can exist in peace, except such laws are framed and held inviolate as will secure to each individual the free exercise of conscience, the right and control of property, and the protection of life.” I think making sure everyone has their natural rights is very important. Without the right of property, protection of life and free exercise of conscience, the government and city would fall apart. Making sure everyone has their own property rights and their own natural rights is one of the most important things about having a free and working country.

In the essay ‘The Success of an Idea’ he talks about the invisible hand and its responsibility in the market system. I think the invisible hand is important in helping things run smoothly. The invisible hand guides each self-interested market participant to act in the interests of others. The invisible hand directs resources to their best use. The story of the pencil helps shows how the free market system works. The invisible hand was behind the cooperation of so many people working together to make something simple like a pencil. Not just one person knows how to make the pencil, working together is what makes the simple product. The coordinating effects of the market system create more abundance out of the scarcity we are given than the centrally planned alternative. I would have a free market system to help things run smoothly in my city.

The third that would be important would be technological change. Technological change helps making workers more productive. You need to have a strong human capital with the knowledge and skills to have technological changes. This helps find the better ways of organizing existing labor, capital, and land.  Technological change can produce more with the same amount of resources. This helps keep the economy going and growing and helps create more entrepreneurs. In countries with entrepreneurs we see implementation of technology and wealth creation, whereas, in countries without entrepreneurs we see stagnation.

Madison and Federalist 51

The difficulty that Madison poses comes from the idea of men governing men. Giving other men the power to govern over us can cause difficult problems and we become subject to them, such as what happened with Hitler that we talked about in class.

                I really like in the Federalist #51 when he says “It is equally evident, that the members of each department should be as little dependent as possible on those of the others.” This is showing that the separation of powers was a way to try and fix the problem of men governing men. In the 10^th amendment they separate the powers between the 3 different branches and the separation of national and state government.

                In Federalist #51 he says “A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.” With those auxiliary precautions he talks about the constitution being a written law to limit the power of the government. The election process and popular sovereignty also limits the power with the idea that we get to choose who is governing us.

Inspired Constitution

Seeing the inspiration for the Constitution is interesting from an LDS point of view.  Of course we all know that this is all a part of God’s plan. To write such an inspired document they all worked together to study and work with each other. They were motivated to actually make the document instead of just talking about it. Elder Dallin H. Oaks brings up a few key points of the Constitution that are inspired. The first point he brings up is the separation of powers. It makes sure that each branch is independent and has its own equal and separate balance of power. The delegates made sure to find the perfect combination to make the separation of powers work. The inspiration obviously came here, there is no way they could have agreed and found the right way to make the combination to make it a good balance for the separation of powers. I like the quote by President Clark that said, “It is this union of independence and dependence of these branches—legislative, executive and judicial—and of the governmental functions possessed by each of them, that constitutes the marvelous genius of this unrivalled document. … As I see it, it was here that the divine inspiration came. It was truly a miracle.”

Another point that he brings up is a written bill of rights. Without the right of religion, America could not have been the right place for the restoration of the gospel. The bill of rights was inspired because it protects those natural God-given rights that each man has such as the right of speech, press and assembly.

                Throughout the Constitution God is brought up and this just helps prove that it truly is an inspired document.  The delegates even said that they were recipients of heavenly inspiration. One of my favorite quotes is when Alexander Hamilton said, “For my own part, I sincerely esteem it a system, which without the finger of God, never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of interest.”

Why the Colonies were morally justified

The colonists were morally justified for declaring independence for many reasons. Before 1763 the balance of power was fair, legislative assembly was elected by the people, all of the tax decisions were to be made by the colonial legislatures, the Governor could veto legislation, the jury consisted of American colonists and they made the decisions together and the Army was a colonial militia. But then Americans were cut loose from the Church of England and started governing on their own. When George III became king in 1760 he wanted to be a strong king. He started by removing Whig leaders from government. He had more power given over parliament and the American Colonies. He increased the number of government appointments and increased the military in America. The Proclamation of 1763, stopped any English settlement west of the Appalachian mountains and made those already settled in those regions to go back to the east in an attempt to ease tensions with Native Americans.  Then in 1764 the Sugar Act was passed to try and raise revenue. The Sugar Act increased the duties of sugar, coffee, wines, indigo and other things. The colonies were mad because it violated their rights. They were taxing without representation. Taxation without representation was a big reason for many people to revolt and stand up for their rights. The Currency Act stopped the colonies south of New England from issuing any legal tender paper money.  In 1765 the Quartering Act made the colonists house the British troops and supply them with food. This angered the colonists and is even a way of taking away their natural right of their own property and liberty.

                To anger the colonists even more, Britain said they can regulate and tax the colonies any way they want to or think is necessary and  the Stamp Act was passed. The Stamp Act made all printed materials taxed, including newspapers, pamphlets, bills, legal documents and licenses. This was the first direct tax on American colonies. This made them angry and continue to boycott with the thought of taxation without representation.  On the day it was to go into effect, there were no stamps available. 

                In 1774 they passed the Coercive Acts also known as the Intolerable Acts. Under the Coercive Acts were: Boston Port Act where they closed the port of Boston until East India Company was compensated. Massachusetts Government Act was when they brought the Massachusetts government under control of the crown.  Administration of Justice Act was when the royal officials no longer had to face trial in colonies.  George Washington called it the “murder act” because if people were not tried they would just be put to death, even if they could have been proven guilty.

                The first Continental Congress was made to stand up for their rights. They set up the Declaration and Resolves. In this they talked about economic sanctions, limit of the power and authority of the Parliament, they are entitled to the same rights as the Englishman and they brought up the natural rights for each man: life, liberty and property. The second Continental Congress came and said that the colonies were declared to be in open rebellion.

                I’ll be honest, I don’t really like history but I am grateful they declared independence. I think the main reason they had was their freedom. They were justified for wanting their own freedom and their natural rights. Everyone has a right for life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness. I think they were justified in boycotting all of the acts because they were all a perfect example of Taxation without representation. This is a valid reason to stand up for what you believe in and the pursuit of freedom.  The colonists felt they were being drained of capital, without having any say in the government that was doing so. I think a valid point may be gained by the historical fact of how many of the writers of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution went home and freed their slaves. They all did not, but a good number immediately did so, and some after a period of time clearly designed to prevent economic upheaval first. Freedom was clearly a driving force in the founders of the United States of America.  I’m proud of the Americans that stood up for freedom and boycotted the Acts that were unfair. One of the purposes of the Declaration of Independence is to outline the natural rights and show that the colonists are correct and justified in wanting to declare independence. The colonists outline in the Declaration of Independence that they believe each person had a right to life, liberty and property. I believe that everyone does have a right to these natural rights. When we were talking in class about these different natural rights we brought up different situations that could test our rights. We talked about health care and I found it really interesting that if everyone was entitled to the health care, we would be taking away the liberty of the doctor to make that choice for us. We also talked about the situation with the donkey and that one man should not have to give away one of his donkeys just because someone doesn’t have any of his own. I also found it interesting when we talked about minimum wage. I believe minimum wage is a good thing because it makes sure people are getting paid what they are supposed to. I also think you can look at minimum wage as a way of taking away the liberty and property of the employer. It’s interesting to see these situations from different points of view. I think that is how it was with the colonies. I believe they were justified to declare independence because they were being treated unfairly and they believe their natural rights were being taken away. I do see that maybe Great Britain saw it from a different point of view and that is why it can be asked whether or not the colonies were justified. I believe they were justified in declaring independence.