The roman empire the economy system got weak. The economy system got weak because of the tribes and pirates outside of the empire disrupting the trade. Trying to expand to their limit, the romans had less of new sources like silver and gold. Extremely desperate for the new sources the government raised all of the taxes. They started to cheat people out of their silver and gold by putting less and less of silver and gold in their metal.
This is demonstrated in documents 4, 5, and 6. Henry Haskell states that “The government undertook such far-reaching responsibility in affairs that the fiber of the citizens weakened” (Document 4) This shows that the decline of the empire was due to heavy taxation that couldn’t support the government. If the taxes couldn’t sustain the government then it wouldn’t be able to control the people. According to Montanelli “The military crisis was the result of… proud old aristocracy’s… shortage of children” (Document 5) This means that many children weren’t old enough to go into the military which caused the decrease of soldiers. With the lack of soldiers, it would be easier to invade Rome, which could’ve led to the decline of the Empire.
Also, many experts say that it fell because of the lack of heart the people had to the Empire, the rise of Christianity, it was too immense to govern and protect, the decline of the economy and jobs, the army being made up of mostly foreigners, and outside invaders. Thus, one can say that the Empire collapsed more internally than externally. The first reason why the Western Roman Empire fell was because the people that lived in it had a lack of heart in the Empire. People didn’t believe the Empire was worth saving anymore. As Strayer, Gatzke, and Harbison state in their textbook The Course of Civilization states “The basic trouble was that very few inhabitants of the empire believed that the old civilization was worth saving… the overwhelming majority of the population had been systematically excluded from political responsibilities.
Furthermore, proposed indirect taxes on luxury goods such as motor cars and petrol would have affected the Lords as they were among the few rich enough to afford such luxuries. The Lords set up a budget protest league and denounced the budget as “confiscation and robbery”, and breaking with convention overwhelmingly vetoed the budget. A less important reason was that the Lords believed the budget amounted to a social revolution. They were worried by the idea of progressive and redistributive taxation which taxes the rich more heavily. They feared once these principles were established they could be extended to ‘soak the rich’ and even out the unfair distribution of wealth in Edwardian Britain.
They would raise rent on peasants who didn’t have much which resulted in people going against authorities. One more reason is the Yellow Turban Uprising; this group of people rose up due to the hardships on the poor. The bureaucrats did not help at all and actually raised taxes and rent even when peasants didn’t have anything to give. The yellow turban rebels revolted against the Han dynasty gradually hurting the government little by
In source 4 we also learn that much must have depended on diplomatic relations with Maximilian and Ferdinand, however Henry’s allies proved unfaithful and unreliable. Source 4, is written by a member of the Government of England. The government is who Henry and Wolsey would go to for Money for these situations. The Government did not like how much Money Henry kept asking for so this could have been reflected in Keith Randall’s report. Henry spent 1.4 millions pounds on fighting wars between 1511-25 and this set England back a far way.
However the monasteries had money in abundance, both in terms of currency and in land. One conclusion is therefore, is that Henry dissolved the monasteries in order to tap their wealth. However, there are also other possible reasons that I believe influenced Henry’s decision to dissolve the greater monasteries. There are also suggestions that Henry believed the dissolution of the monasteries was necessary because the Church and the clerical order as a whole was becoming increasingly corrupt. The three sources also mostly agree with the view that the dissolution of larger monasteries was largely driven by financial motives.
These other causes are all political social and economical factors which helped to free the serfs. And had the Tsar taken a more liberal view on his rule the emancipation may never have happened. Firstly there are many political causes for the emancipation of the serfs. The bankruptcy of nobles who were the tsar’s main supporters was, caused because of the inefficiency of using serfs to farm lands, which meant most nobles were losing money and by 1860 over 60% of serfs were mortgaged to the government meaning they were “unofficially” no longer tied to their land. This meant serfdom was already coming to its own natural end, and for Alexander II to support his nobles he had to emancipate the serfs so they could go start increasing their wealth and get out of debt.
Simply put the policy worked on the theme with more money, a country has more power. The English colonists lost a lot of their money to the England and the monarchy because of the mercantilism policy. It was bad deal all the way around since the colonists sold their raw materials to the mother country at ridiculously low prices and bought back the finished products at exceedingly high prices because they could not complete the finished product. The second part of the policy was that a nation must regulate its trade to sell more than it buys. This ultimately brought the Navigation
People were mad about the changes that he made and choose to blame him because he was the President. One policy that Bush changed was a policy that gave tax cuts. Instead of these cuts being for the poor who already could not afford much, the break was given to the wealthy. With less taxes being taken from the wealthy, there was a deficit in tax money coming in. The poorer people had to pay more taxes that they could not afford, while the wealthy got to spend more on whatever they wanted.