What themes stood out most to you in the assigned readings and lecture this week? What questions did the lectures and readings raise for you? Please post your responses in the comment section below.
I thought the biggest theme this week was the backdrop of the Great Depression. It's generally regarded as a financial recession (like the one in 2008), so it's interesting to look at some of the other issues like stagnant worker wages and agricultural price problems. I also thought it was interesting that much of the economic fallout was caused by the overuse of consumer credit, which had driven the economy throughout the 1920s. The question I had was - how did the Great Depression shape the American identity, which was throughout the 20s a culture of consumption?
The theme that stood out to me most was how some of the problems at the time of the Great Depression are still, to some extent, problems we face today. The overuse of credit and mass consumption is seen through extensive credit card bills that control the lives of many, and the real estate crisis when people were easily getting mortgages, but could not pay for them. Farmers at the time of the Great Depression were stricken with poverty level wages. Now, farmers are facing legal and economic pressures due to Monsanto, which is driving them out of a livable wage. The top 1 % had 15% of the nations income in 1929, showing the wage disparity there was at the time going into the Depression. In present time, the top 1% have about 40% of the nations wealth. Although the Great Depression was significantly worse than the Great Recession, there are these similarities that I could not help but to think about during this week. A question I have from the week is, how did the wealthy react to the economic situation?
Probably the most significant theme this week was the Great Depression. The stock market crash of 1929 seemed to kick off a time of massive unemployment and extreme poverty and that crash was the result of a combination of factors. The over evaluation of stocks, the fact that the top 1% was receiving 15% of the nations income, stagnant workers wages, overextension of consumer credit, and finally the ongoing decline in the agricultural sector all lead to Black Tuesday. Hoover tried to help alleviate Americans of this burden by implementing plans aimed to keep workers employed and keep businesses manufacturing goods and services at same rate so employment could stay up. Ultimately, the decline in buying goods forced decline in production that led to cuts in wages and unemployment.
From today's lecture, it was interesting to view Hoover's project during the Great Depression as the foundation for FDR's New Deal. I didn't learn a lot about the connection between Great Depression and Hoover before (maybe because I am not an American), and I read the book chapter that put a lot of blame on Hoover. Today, it was nice to have that different perspective and able to see the complexity on this issue.
It was interesting to think about in today's lecture the effectiveness in Hoover's projects and acts during the Great Depression. In a way, they did end up setting the groundwork for FDR's New Deal, so they were effective in that way, but overall he was not successful. The Agricultural Marketing Act and the Hawley Smoot Tariff both failed, and the economy continued to decline with the Public Works Projects. While it is a bit complicated, I feel that Hoover's projects were not effective because the economy continued to decline with their implementation. A question I have from this week is, how much were the wealthy affected by the Great Depression?
By far the most significant theme of the week's lecture was the Great Depression and the events that led to it. Obviously, it would have been EXTREMELY difficult for the national government to put a curb on the near endless supply of credit available during the 20s as such a decision would be political suicide in the roaring economic prosperity of the time period. However, it could have prevented the Depression, or at the very least reduce its effects. As a result, all decisions to curb the Depression had to be made after the event; these acts such as Hawley-Smoot and the AMA failed both in the public eye and economically. From this, Hoover lost his presidency to FDR to bring about the New Deal. My question is what could Hoover (or Coolidge for that matter) actually have done earlier in the 20s to prevent the Great Depression from ever occurring?
I thought the most interesting part of the lecture this week was the discussion of the build up to the Great Depression. After WWI, American society was benefitting from post-war prosperity, with production and manufacturing expanding and wealth growing for the middle class. However, this perceived prosperity covered up the underlying problems in the national economy, and set the stage for a major banking failure. Things such as the overextension of credit and bad loans from banks compounded throughout the decade, and it only took one weekend of panic to send the whole system crashing down. My question is whether there were indications early on that this economic prosperity and freedom was causing problems, and the people in charge chose to ignore them, or if people were truly blindsided by the bank failures?
The Johnson-Reed Act in 1924 restricted immigration to the United States. It would be very interesting to see how radically different the effects of the Great Depression would have been had more people been living in the United States. There would have been a much larger unemployment rate, a larger demand for welfare and mass production, etc. I wonder if there were any plans or sentiments to further restrict immigrants, or redact any citizenship to American Indians that had been granted in the mid 1920s.
I thought the most interesting part of the lecture this week was the discussion of the causes of the Great Depression. In particular, the Banks operated without guarantees to their customers, creating a climate of panic when times got tough. Few regulations were placed on banks and they lent money to those who speculated recklessly in stocks. Also, Middle class Americans had already stretched their debt capacities by purchasing automobiles and household appliances on installment plans and with credit. The widespread availability of consumer credit allowed people to buy goods with money they would not be able to pay back. This dilemma was strikingly similar to the real estate bubble in the 2000s, In which banks gave out countless loans to people who did not qualify, leading to a crash in the market. My question for the week is: How would the government assist the failing banks and assure American’s financial security?
What stood out to me was the idea that the early 1900's was an age of upheaval and change in American society. Black nationalists gained strength in numbers, and women fought for their social independence after winning the right to vote. The age of religious fundamentalism became a hot topic after theories of science and evolution began to denounce religious beliefs, and feelings against immigrants arose as the age of nativism inspired that idea that Europeans were of a different race. People held a variety of different and new ideals that proved controversial in the landscape of traditional American society.
What stood out to me the most during this weeks lectures and readings was the backdrop in American society prior to the great depression. The idea of consumer credit and mass consumerism was not one I had heard before. I had always been under the assumption that it was simply the stock market crash, and there had been nothing really behind it. The fact that the American economy was built on credit and the attempts of the federal government to help prevent the collapse were entirely new. By trying to fix the problem by throwing money at it in the form of giving money to banks and owners, the government simply made it worse. The banks faced little regulation and the owners did not have to increase wages for workers. It simply led to the hoarding of real capital, and the increase of credit, which ultimately led to the collapse, when no one could pay their credit debt, and banks went bankrupt. My question this week is, to what extent did the lack of federal regulation influence the economic failures of the 1920s?
One of the most interesting questions that arises when studying the great depression and the period surrounding it, at least to me, is whether or not it could have been prevented. The fact that consumerism and buying on credit was such a large part of the market in the 1920s suggests that such a collapse was imminent due to the overvaluing of credit, as mentioned in class. Additionally, issues with the banking systems, such as lacking guarantees to their costumers, further supported the inevitably of such an event occurring at some point in such a system. My question for the week is what actions needed to be taken to avoid the depression, or at least limit its severity?
The big theme that I gathered from this weeks lectures was that the Great Depression was caused by several factors, including a false sense of excessive wealth in the country. With the crippling unemployment rate and Hoover's lackluster tactics that seemed to only worsen the depression, the country faced economic hardship for the next decade. My question is what was the premise for Hoover believing the tariff he put in place would actually help the American economy?
I thought the biggest theme this week was the backdrop of the Great Depression. It's generally regarded as a financial recession (like the one in 2008), so it's interesting to look at some of the other issues like stagnant worker wages and agricultural price problems. I also thought it was interesting that much of the economic fallout was caused by the overuse of consumer credit, which had driven the economy throughout the 1920s. The question I had was - how did the Great Depression shape the American identity, which was throughout the 20s a culture of consumption?
ReplyDeleteThe theme that stood out to me most was how some of the problems at the time of the Great Depression are still, to some extent, problems we face today. The overuse of credit and mass consumption is seen through extensive credit card bills that control the lives of many, and the real estate crisis when people were easily getting mortgages, but could not pay for them. Farmers at the time of the Great Depression were stricken with poverty level wages. Now, farmers are facing legal and economic pressures due to Monsanto, which is driving them out of a livable wage. The top 1 % had 15% of the nations income in 1929, showing the wage disparity there was at the time going into the Depression. In present time, the top 1% have about 40% of the nations wealth. Although the Great Depression was significantly worse than the Great Recession, there are these similarities that I could not help but to think about during this week. A question I have from the week is, how did the wealthy react to the economic situation?
ReplyDeleteProbably the most significant theme this week was the Great Depression. The stock market crash of 1929 seemed to kick off a time of massive unemployment and extreme poverty and that crash was the result of a combination of factors. The over evaluation of stocks, the fact that the top 1% was receiving 15% of the nations income, stagnant workers wages, overextension of consumer credit, and finally the ongoing decline in the agricultural sector all lead to Black Tuesday. Hoover tried to help alleviate Americans of this burden by implementing plans aimed to keep workers employed and keep businesses manufacturing goods and services at same rate so employment could stay up. Ultimately, the decline in buying goods forced decline in production that led to cuts in wages and unemployment.
ReplyDeleteFrom today's lecture, it was interesting to view Hoover's project during the Great Depression as the foundation for FDR's New Deal. I didn't learn a lot about the connection between Great Depression and Hoover before (maybe because I am not an American), and I read the book chapter that put a lot of blame on Hoover. Today, it was nice to have that different perspective and able to see the complexity on this issue.
ReplyDeleteIt was interesting to think about in today's lecture the effectiveness in Hoover's projects and acts during the Great Depression. In a way, they did end up setting the groundwork for FDR's New Deal, so they were effective in that way, but overall he was not successful. The Agricultural Marketing Act and the Hawley Smoot Tariff both failed, and the economy continued to decline with the Public Works Projects. While it is a bit complicated, I feel that Hoover's projects were not effective because the economy continued to decline with their implementation. A question I have from this week is, how much were the wealthy affected by the Great Depression?
ReplyDeleteBy far the most significant theme of the week's lecture was the Great Depression and the events that led to it. Obviously, it would have been EXTREMELY difficult for the national government to put a curb on the near endless supply of credit available during the 20s as such a decision would be political suicide in the roaring economic prosperity of the time period. However, it could have prevented the Depression, or at the very least reduce its effects. As a result, all decisions to curb the Depression had to be made after the event; these acts such as Hawley-Smoot and the AMA failed both in the public eye and economically. From this, Hoover lost his presidency to FDR to bring about the New Deal. My question is what could Hoover (or Coolidge for that matter) actually have done earlier in the 20s to prevent the Great Depression from ever occurring?
ReplyDeleteI thought the most interesting part of the lecture this week was the discussion of the build up to the Great Depression. After WWI, American society was benefitting from post-war prosperity, with production and manufacturing expanding and wealth growing for the middle class. However, this perceived prosperity covered up the underlying problems in the national economy, and set the stage for a major banking failure. Things such as the overextension of credit and bad loans from banks compounded throughout the decade, and it only took one weekend of panic to send the whole system crashing down. My question is whether there were indications early on that this economic prosperity and freedom was causing problems, and the people in charge chose to ignore them, or if people were truly blindsided by the bank failures?
ReplyDeleteThe Johnson-Reed Act in 1924 restricted immigration to the United States. It would be very interesting to see how radically different the effects of the Great Depression would have been had more people been living in the United States. There would have been a much larger unemployment rate, a larger demand for welfare and mass production, etc. I wonder if there were any plans or sentiments to further restrict immigrants, or redact any citizenship to American Indians that had been granted in the mid 1920s.
ReplyDeleteI thought the most interesting part of the lecture this week was the discussion of the causes of the Great Depression. In particular, the Banks operated without guarantees to their customers, creating a climate of panic when times got tough. Few regulations were placed on banks and they lent money to those who speculated recklessly in stocks. Also, Middle class Americans had already stretched their debt capacities by purchasing automobiles and household appliances on installment plans and with credit. The widespread availability of consumer credit allowed people to buy goods with money they would not be able to pay back. This dilemma was strikingly similar to the real estate bubble in the 2000s, In which banks gave out countless loans to people who did not qualify, leading to a crash in the market. My question for the week is: How would the government assist the failing banks and assure American’s financial security?
ReplyDeleteWhat stood out to me was the idea that the early 1900's was an age of upheaval and change in American society. Black nationalists gained strength in numbers, and women fought for their social independence after winning the right to vote. The age of religious fundamentalism became a hot topic after theories of science and evolution began to denounce religious beliefs, and feelings against immigrants arose as the age of nativism inspired that idea that Europeans were of a different race. People held a variety of different and new ideals that proved controversial in the landscape of traditional American society.
ReplyDeleteWhat stood out to me the most during this weeks lectures and readings was the backdrop in American society prior to the great depression. The idea of consumer credit and mass consumerism was not one I had heard before. I had always been under the assumption that it was simply the stock market crash, and there had been nothing really behind it. The fact that the American economy was built on credit and the attempts of the federal government to help prevent the collapse were entirely new. By trying to fix the problem by throwing money at it in the form of giving money to banks and owners, the government simply made it worse. The banks faced little regulation and the owners did not have to increase wages for workers. It simply led to the hoarding of real capital, and the increase of credit, which ultimately led to the collapse, when no one could pay their credit debt, and banks went bankrupt. My question this week is, to what extent did the lack of federal regulation influence the economic failures of the 1920s?
ReplyDeleteOne of the most interesting questions that arises when studying the great depression and the period surrounding it, at least to me, is whether or not it could have been prevented. The fact that consumerism and buying on credit was such a large part of the market in the 1920s suggests that such a collapse was imminent due to the overvaluing of credit, as mentioned in class. Additionally, issues with the banking systems, such as lacking guarantees to their costumers, further supported the inevitably of such an event occurring at some point in such a system. My question for the week is what actions needed to be taken to avoid the depression, or at least limit its severity?
ReplyDeleteThe big theme that I gathered from this weeks lectures was that the Great Depression was caused by several factors, including a false sense of excessive wealth in the country. With the crippling unemployment rate and Hoover's lackluster tactics that seemed to only worsen the depression, the country faced economic hardship for the next decade. My question is what was the premise for Hoover believing the tariff he put in place would actually help the American economy?
ReplyDelete