During the period between 1880 and 1900, agrarian discontent increased as a result of the rise of cities, deflation of the American money, and problems with railroads and freight shipping. Farmers also complained about unfair railroads policies towards shippers. Railroad companies discriminated, by charging bigger businesses lower priced shipping rates and charging individual shippers highly overpriced shipping rates. In the Octopus, by Frank Norris, the con of the practice is displayed as the main character, farmer Dyke, discovers that the shipping rate being charged will put him at a loss rather than profit. Congress believed that farmers were right and passed the Interstate Commerce Act, in order to regulate railroads and ensure fair rates to all people.
This refusal to agree with each other and frequent 'slating' of the decisions was not the appropriate conditions for a democracy, as many people would be unhappy for a majority of proposed arrangements. It is argued that an autocracy worked better in this situation as one person was able to finalise decisions, avoiding unecessary conflicts in the Reichstag. Therefore, almost by default, Germany appeared to work as a democratic system. The year 1908 marked the event of The Hottentot Election. The Centre Party joined the SPD in voting down government plans for a railway that would ruin the lives of the colonists that had settled down in the way.
* Lost terriorty in Poland & Western Russia – PG were blamed for losses just like the Tsar was when took charge. * War made finical problems – Inflation still a problem and food shortages were high. * Russia expected these things to be stored out – PG short-lived because they were full of empty promises. Promised land reform to the peasants ( made up a large amount of the population , Bolshevik priority was to keep them on their side) no action was taken * Couldn’t guarantee food supplies as because soviet controlled the railways. * Political reform also promised political reform in an attempt to stop the revolutionaries but no action was taken.
Clinical and anatomincal studies compare what people could do before their brain damage with what they can do afterwards. For example the case study of Phineas Gage in 1848 whereby an iron pole ripped out his pre-frontal lobe as a consequence of an explosion while working on the railways. This damaged his personality from being a sensible, kind and reserved to someone who was now boisterous, lazy and rude. This case study taught psychologists a great deal about the complexity of psychological processes that occur in the human brain. However a limitation of this study is that the sample size is small so would be difficult to generalise because of individual differences in humans.
That agricultural industry in the South was so corrupt that farmers gained no profit from their livestock and crops, therefore was inefficient and moving backwards. Communication between the North and South was very difficult, almost as if the North and South were two different countries, the Liberal government didn’t do a very good job in controlling the two divisions. Cavour said “To harmonise the north with the south is more difficult than to fight Austria or struggle with Rome.” In 1896 Italy tried to gain back their empire, in doing so they tried to take Adowa back in Africa, but suffered a humiliating defeat, and stunted their right to being called ‘a Great Nation’. Due to the fact that Liberal Italy found it hard to communicate across the two divisions, Liberal Italy was therefore unstable and not very secure. The new
* The Age of Jackson, from the 1820's to the 1830's, was a period of American history full of contradictions, especially in regard to democracy. * During the Age of Jackson, enslavement of Blacks, the ultimate form of inequality, was at a new high in America. At the same time, enormous disparities of wealth existed between rich merchants, industrialists and planters, and immigrants. The Jacksonian Democrats were, to some extent, champions of the Constitution, democracy, liberty, and equality. However, in other ways, Jackson and his followers clearly failed to live up to their ideals.
He wanted them to be able to fix their problems themselves and let the government do more important jobs and have to worry about them less. He wanted them to become strong, independent people, but when America’s situation was as bad as it was nothing the people did could get them out of that situation. The government needed to step in and help them get out of the hole because they were too far in to pull themselves out. This concept had good intentions, but failed miserably. FDR’s Liberal ideas set new ground rules for the coming presidents to follow and his spirit and work ethic were going to be the top bar the next Presidents would have to compete with, even still
A significant percentage of company flotations were fraudulent during the nineteenth century. Although the behaviour of the corrupt businessman provoked outrage and, when caught and convicted, a hefty prison sentence, he was usually described as an exception to the rule, a 'black sheep' or a 'rotten apple' in contemporary parlance. He was not conceived as a member of those who, particularly in the 1860s, the Victorians labelled as 'the criminal class'. | Overall crime had definitely increased during the industrial revolution as there were much more different items you could thieve so this was a big temptation for people to steal. Also the increase in robbery.
The Sherman Act and how monopolies get a bad rap I don’t think it is any secret that the word “monopoly” carries a negative connotation in our society. I have to admit that up until a few weeks ago I would have said that monopolies are always an inherently bad thing for consumers. Obviously that isn’t the case, but there does appear to be a great deal of agreement that when monopolies take actions which have anti-competitive consequences this is harmful to consumers in the long-run, hence the Sherman Act of 1890. Stranger to me though is how up until a few hours ago I would’ve said that the Sherman Act was definitely a good thing. It makes sense that the government should take actions to stop monopolies from doing the things the Sherman Act makes illegal.
A CASE STUDY ANALYSIS: GOOD AND EVIL ON THE RAILS | | 10/14/2013 10/14/2013 1.0 Introduction The ethical dilemma presented in the case study is in regard to the government intervening and trying to regulate business specifically in the sphere of transportation safety in the railroad industry. The case describes an egregious example of a railroad engineer’s disregard for safety regulations resulting in an accident in which 24 passengers died and over 100 more were injured in southern California. Against regulations, the engineer was texting and phoning from the cab while operating the train, but managerial oversight of the in-cab activity of engineers was almost impossible due to the lack of cameras in train cabs. In the aftermath of the accident, the U.S. Congress passed a comprehensive law aimed at preventing such incidents in the future—a law resulting in billions of dollars of cost to railroad companies but having low government-identified cost/benefit ratios. The most expensive part of the law required positive train controls (allowing remote operators to take control of a train if necessary) be installed on most trains at a cost “between $9.6 billion and $13.3 billion over 20 years.” The benefit-cost calculations performed by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) were just “$440 million to $674 million over 20 years” (Steiner, 2012, p. 350).