Equality and justice have always been present in the aspirations of human beings; peace and joy have never strayed far from the American dream either. From the beginning, when the colonist were seeking to tear themselves away from the chokehold of Britain, they just wanted to be heard, left alone, have their land, liberty, and justice. But the monarchy that was squeezing the life out of them, wouldn’t give them that. Our government has become too powerful, according to Greg Mannarino, the present economy now is soon to collapse. The Central Banks won’t stop printing money (making the dollar depreciate in value); America only keeps consuming and borrowing; the U.S is the biggest debtor in the history of the world; and finally, we need a new monetary system. His opponent Dock David Treece, says that there will be no economic collapse (at least an apocalyptic one in his point of view), there will be trouble in about 5 to 10 years, but soon there will be more manufacturing jobs coming back to the U.S. He believes that the time is right to have the job market open up again in the U.S. Where did all this controversy originate from? In history. The actions that the ancestors of the national banking system and the monetary system created are to blame.
Alexander Hamilton, a shrewd man when it came to economics, was the left hand of George Washington. Thomas Jefferson and his party, were the right. According to Karl Walling , Hamilton wanted a republican form of government, but the majority of Hamilton’s ideas derived from the British Monarch, the idea of the Central Bank was based upon European Central Banks. He wanted there to be a Central bank that would be like an overlord to the state bank, would have the upper hand on interest, and...
... middle of paper ...
...nd there was no uniform currency, there were a series of panics and bank shut from 1837-1913. There was a lot of counterfeiting, banks were becoming hard to trust and since the banks were giving out more notes than they had in stocks, their value started to diminish. This is exactly what has been occurring in the U.S today. Mannarino states that the Central Banks have to stop printing money, America has to become productive and stop borrowing money to become prosperous.
Works Cited
Gordon, John Steele. "The Founding Father of American Financial Disaster." American History Vol.44 No.1 2009: 30-7. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web.
Roark, James L., Michael P. Johnson, Patricia C. Cohen, Sarah Stage, and Susan M. Hartman. "Turbulent Times: Election and Rebellion." THE American Promise: A History of The United States. 5th Edition ed. Vol. 1. Boston | New York: Bedford/St.
In the book Founding Brothers by Joseph Ellis, the author relates the stories of six crucial historic events that manage to capture the flavor and fervor of the revolutionary generation and its great leaders. While each chapter or story can be read separately and completely understood, they do relate to a broader common theme. One of Ellis' main purposes in writing the book was to illustrate the early stages and tribulations of the American government and its system through his use of well blended stories. The idea that a republican government of this nature was completely unprecedented is emphasized through out the book. Ellis discusses the unique problems that the revolutionary generation experienced as a result of governing under the new concept of a democracy. These problems included- the interpretation of constitutional powers, the regulation of governmental power through checks and balances, the first presidential elections, the surprising emergence of political parties, states rights vs. federal authority, and the issue of slavery in a otherwise free society. Ellis dives even deeper into the subject by exposing the readers to true insight of the major players of the founding generation. The book attempts to capture the ideals of the early revolutionary generation leaders and their conflicting political viewpoints. The personalities of Hamilton, Burr, Adams, Washington, Madison, and Jefferson are presented in great detail. Ellis exposes the reality of the internal and partisan conflict endured by each of these figures in relation to each other. Ellis emphasizes that despite these difficult hurdles, the young American nation survived its early stages because of its great collection of charismatic leaders and their ability to ...
In addition to the powerful coordination the Bank possessed, it influenced interest rates for loans to the working class and the rate of inflation in the nation. Because of the use of various bank notes, variegating from bank to bank due to the lack of national currency and mixture of specie, people trusted that each bank would be able to “cash in” their bank note for specie. This did not always hold true, but the Second Bank of the United States was the most trusted of the banks to supply specie in exchange for their bank notes. Because of this most people, in order to protect themselves from losing money, would exchange state bank notes for notes issued by the Second Bank. However, this meant that the Second Bank could threaten the state banks by demanding more gold, which might cause for their bankruptcy. As a result, the state banks were pressured into not being able to over issue their bank notes, which inevitably decreased their importance and power in the nation by decreasing the circulation of their bank notes. This was the greatest argument posed by the leaders of the state banks against the Second Bank of the United States (Roughshod 2).
In the winter of 1786-1787, many farmers protesting the foreclosure of their farms took up arms and stormed county courthouses across Massachusetts. All over New England, there existed a growing frustration with the American postwar situation under the Articles of Confederation. Massachusetts farmers’ disconnection from the Boston government rendered the situation more volatile than anywhere else. “Connecticut, New Hampshire, and Vermont instituted harsh laws to stem the growth of insurrection. But inland Massachusetts was so heavily agrarian that the rebellion gathered steam.”[2] Backcountry farmers banded together in mobs of up to one thousand men and marched to different cities, rioting in front of prominent shops and courthouses in order to make their frustrations heard.
From Revolution to Reconstruction.2006. “An Outline of American History (1994).”[Available Online][cited June 20, 2008] http://www.let.rug.nl/
The federalist versus anti-federalist opposition to begin the political differences. Federalists were a group of people who pushed for a strong central government and weak state governments, while anti-federalists were a group of people who pushed for power in the states and not the central government. Hamilton, a Federalist, was a firm believer in the construction of a strong central government and a broad interpretation of the Constitution. A broad interpretation of the Constitution meant more government control of the people. Hamilton believed that if a government were to operate efficiently, it would have to be conducted by the educated. Although at the time period, being educated was an expectation for only white men and a limitation for men of color and women. Through Hamilton’s position as being the Secretary of the Treasury, he was able to propose the idea of a national bank. His proposition of the bank was to serve as a way to help America back onto its feet after the Revolutionary War.The bank would regulate currency, help control the American currency, and prevent any singular group from having the most power. According to the Necessary and Proper Clause located in article 1, section 8, clause 18 of the United States Constitution, Hamilton believed the government had the implied powers to use it in order to help and protect the American people.Not only would the bank
In the initial stages of independence, the United States was still a weak and vulnerable country. Thus, it was necessary to implement plans that not only had the goal of a bright future, but would help the United States survive to that point. Due to the countries weak state, and his influential position atop the United States treasury, Hamilton was able to implement most of his economic policies. The biggest of which were his consolidation of international and domestic debt and creating a national bank. Republics were seen as weak back then, they very rarely succeeded and the U.S. was already in a vulnerable state because of the revolutionary war. Hamilton’s national bank and centralized government was a good idea in this aspect because it not only would create a sense of unification and power among the U.S. but it also put foreign debts first, which was
Throughout the first half of the 19th century, and especially after the War of 1812, America has taken on yet another revolution. In this time period, the country saw a rapid expansion in territory and economics, as well as the extension of democratic politics; the spread of evangelical revivalism; the rise of the nation’s first labor and reform movements; the growth of cities and industrial ways of life; a rise in abolitionism and reduction in the power of slavery; and radical shifts in the roles and status of women.
Hamilton's Federalist Party and the Democratic Republicans led by Thomas Jefferson had polarized views on the majority of the important political issues. These two political parties which possessed differing opinions and views pertaining to the future of the U.S. government were persistent in their respective arguments against each other. The strongly contrasting views of these two parties are the foundation of the puissant and sometimes callous attacks by the Republicans against Hamilton and his economic plan. Although Alexander Hamilton was viewed as an arrogant self-promoting individual, the primary reason he faced fierce opposition from the Democratic Republicans against his economic plans was strictly rooted in the fundamental differences that Hamilton and the Republicans held when debating their proposed structures of the U.S. government.
One such issue was that of the National debt and creating a National Bank. In 1790, Alexander Hamilton proposed that Congress should establish a national bank, in which private investors could buy stock, could print paper money, and keep government finances safe. Washington signed the bill establishing a national bank and started a strong foundation for a thriving economy and a stable currency.
After the first War for Independence, The United States was approximately $52 million in debt. Due to having such bad financial problems, the United States created a national Bank to create one unified currency, to take away all state debts, and to issue loans to the people to promote growth. This National Bank was created by Alexander Hamilton who was a Federalist, and once Jefferson came to be the President, he continued the idea of the national bank because it was helping to reduce the national debt. The primary reason for the National Bank being a representation of a Federalist idea was because since it was issuing loans to people it was able to promote industrial growth which was one of the main goals of the Federalist party. From Jefferson continuing the use of the National Bank thru his presidency he demonstrates his need to continue a loose constructionist idea.
Friedman, Milton and Jacobson Schwartz, Anna. A Monetary History of the United States, 1867-1960. Princeton, 1963
The early years of the Constitution of the United States were full of political strife. The two prominent political ideals were complete opposites. The Jeffersonian Republicans were focused on giving power to the people and maintaining a pastoral economy, while the Federalists supported the control of the government by the elite class, and maintaining “positive” democracy. Both parties feared the influence and effect the other party would have on the public. In Linda K. Kerber's article, “The Fears of the Federalists”, the major concerns Federalists held in the early 19th century are described. Ever since the war with and separation from England, the citizens of America were seen to be continually drive to “patriotic rebellion” as a way to voice their wants. Violence was not an uncommon practice of the era (the use of mob tactics was prevalent), but Federalists feared that if Democratic values were abused and unrestrained, the country would fall into anarchy.
Roark, J.L., Johnson, M.P., Cohen, P.C., Stage, S., Lawson, A., Hartmann, S.M. (2009). The american promise: A history of the united states (4th ed.), The New West and Free North 1840-1860, The slave south, 1820-1860, The house divided 1846-1861 (Vol. 1, pp. 279-354).
The issue of whether or not America should have a National Bank is one that is debated throughout the whole beginning stages of the modern United States governmental system. In the 1830-1840’s two major differences in opinion over the National Bank can be seen by the Jacksonian Democrats and the Whig parties. The Jacksonian Democrats did not want a National Bank for many reasons. One main reason was the distrust in banks instilled in Andrew Jackson because his land was taken away. Another reason is that the creation of a National Bank would make it more powerful than...
In 1962, Milton Friedman wrote the essay “Should There Be An Independent Central Bank?” Since then, half a century has passed. Nowadays, many countries in the world have their independent central banks. But the discussion about whether central banks should be independent does not end. This paper will try to 1) provide the arguments on both pros and cons whether central banks should be independent; 2) provides evidence about the relationship between central bank independence and inflation in developed countries, developing countries and transition countries.