I just read an article on the Pullman recession of 1893 with the Railroad Industry, Certainly, the article was marred with biased, but it made it look as if the Pullman company, being a deregulated entity, had made everyone suffer for its greedy investments. This caused a disaster.
I don't know about about the recession of that time, nor the history behind it, However, I';d like it if someone could enlighten me as to how it actually happened. The progressive party, as well as my grandfater are convinced The Free Market is at fault for this.
I hate to admit it, but I did not see anything related to The Government when I read the article, other then how they coerced striking workers.
The Pullman problem was part of the larger boom/bust caused by a fractional-reserve system.
Knight_of_BAAWA: The Pullman problem was part of the larger boom/bust caused by a fractional-reserve system.
I'd like to see an article in relaiton to this.
bump
Rothbard offers a brief discussion of the Panic of 1893 in A History of Money and Banking in the United States, pages 167-169, which suggests that this was a regular fractional-reserve banking enabled recession, aggravated by quasi-bimetallism policies (e.g. the Sherman Silver Purchase Act of 1890) and protectionism (the McKinley Tariff of 1890). Hope that helps.
britainland: Rothbard offers a brief discussion of the Panic of 1893 in A History of Money and Banking in the United States, pages 167-169, which suggests that this was a regular fractional-reserve banking enabled recession, aggravated by quasi-bimetallism policies (e.g. the Sherman Silver Purchase Act of 1890) and protectionism (the McKinley Tariff of 1890). Hope that helps.
Then how come the popular opinion is otherwise? I can't see how its reversible because of its legacy of Labor Day.
I haven't been able to find a full Austrian analysis of the recession of 1893. But with just a glance at the facts it seems to fit the Austrian Business Cycle Theory quite nicely.
Due to the National Bank system, the money supply (M2) rose throughout the 1880s. This was followed by a concentrated inflationary burst provided by the Sherman Silver Purchase Act of 1890. As with the tech and housing bubbles, easy money will tend to blow up bubbles in specific sectors. The monetary expansion of the 1880s and early 90s happened to blow up a massive railroad bubble which popped in 1893.
As for "The Government coercing striking workers", the wrongness of government is in its wrong actions, not in its name. If an entity named government happens to do something just, like the federal government under Grover Cleveland protecting private property from violent railway strikers, it doesn't absolve their other unjust acts. But the just act is a good thing nonetheless.
Human Action Comics Issues 1-6
Which was caused by people blindly obeying the government.
At most, 5% of the population would need to stop complying to bring down the government.
Democracy for Breakfast:Then how come the popular opinion is otherwise?
Because everyday people aren't into studying business cycle theories, the inner working of the banking system, and money supply statistics, and "it was the greedy capitalists" is a short and simple answer with a convenient scape-goat?
Popular opinion doesn't make anything true or false.
If you can, search out a book by Henry George on (the unbelievable corruption of) land grants to railroads in California from 1870 on, which contains his speech to the Pullman union as he ran for mayor of NYC; likewise the Borse collapse and panic of 1873. Tom Wood's Meltdown may have some info on these but this is just my guess from hearing him speak rather than having read the book.
Why does many a man write? Because he does not possess enough character not to write. ---Karl Kraus.
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap