Was John D. Rockefeller a robber baron? I’d say so. Through ruthless business tactics and exploitation of workers, he made a fortune in his lifetime. In this paper, I’m going to be talking about said business tactics and exploitation. If you believe Rockefeller was just a good business man who donated to the poor, I hope your view will be changed by the end.
There are many ways Andrew Carnegie was a robber baron, yes. Yet, he always did things to help the community grow and helped people. In document 5 Carnegie shows a chart shows his foundation and the amount of money it donates to different things and people. In 2005 his foundation was giving out about $100,000,000 a year to education. Trying to give others the opportunity to young people to be just as successful in life as Andrew. The way he looked at money in the 1870’s is helping others even after his death.
In the late 1800’s, J.P Morgan, John Rockefeller, and Andrew Carnegie had a negative impact on society because they were Robber Barons. They treated their workers very poorly in a way that should not have happened. J.P Morgan forced his workers to labor under harsh conditions for long hours and low pay. This is coming from a guy who has made millions of dollars and who has started a 60 million dollar business. Knowing how much money he has and how very little he pays his workers shows how ruthless he is as a business owner. Likewise, John Rockefeller forced his workers to work long hours for low pay. He also discouraged union activity in his corporation. It seems oddly unfair the he donated millions of dollars to many different causes but
In the past, there have been many influential economic figures in the industrial business industry. Andrew Carnegie is one of the most famous of these figures but not just in a business scheme, but also in an economic and national scheme. Andrew Carnegie is a business man that caused a major controversial issue to arise; the topic of being labeled a Robber Baron or a Captain of Industry by the public. A Robber Baron is someone who has become wealthy through heartless and unethical business actions that will only benefit the individual. On the other hand, a Captain of Industry is a business leader who has become rich by accomplishing activities that will, overall, benefit the people of the community such as expanding a market or providing more jobs. There have been many debates on which one
Was Cornelius Vanderbilt a Robber Baron or Captain of Industry? A cruel businessman or an industrious leader? Henry J. Raymond believed that Vanderbilt was “a monopolist that crushed other competitors”(T.J Stiles). While he is also deemed one of America’s leading businessmen, and is also credited for helping shape the United States. His fortunes were made unfairly in some cases but his million dollar contribution to the Navy was very generous. Bill Gates was a wealthy man who might have been greedy and only in for the money. He was also a generous man who employed a lot of people and donated $40 million.
The Gilded Age was an era that transformed from agrarian to industrialized working/businesses and goods. The Gilded Age soon came after Reconstruction and lasted from the late 1860’s to the late 1890’s. During the Gilded Age there were many businessmen that were labeled Robber Barons or Captains of Industry based on their actions of ruthlessness and monopoly or their actions of generosity and kindness. A Robber Baron is a businessman who obtained wealth through cruel manors. A Captain of Industry is a business leader who obtained wealth through positive and generous ways that had a good impact on those around them. History should remember the entrepreneurs of the 1800’s and 1900’s as Captains of Industries or Robber Barons. These entrepreneurs
There are two types of businessmen in this world, “Robber Barons” and “Captains of Industry”. “Robber Baron” is a idiom established during the United States Industrial Revolution of the 1800s. It is used to describe demeaning businessman that are wealthy industrialist, those who monopolize companies, and use unfair practices within their businesses. On the other hand “Captains of Industry” are positive businessman that contribute to the nation. For instance they provide jobs, increase productivity, expand the markets, and increase trade. Some even make generous philanthropies to the people who are less fortunate. Although it is good to be a “Captain of Industry”, Rockefeller and Walton were both degrading “Robber Barons”. From this moment forward
In the Progressive Era, there were many problems that the American people faced. America was broken, unjust, and cruel during that era. The people became acocomuomed to the corruption, horrible living conditions,and terrible working and safety conditions. The vast number of problems; however, were solved by what we call-- muckrakers, who then with the help of others came to bring about a new laws.
The United States of America has gone through many eras in its young, two-century history, driven by innovation and progress through the various individuals and groups that have contributed with long lasting effects. It is important to note, however, the conflicts that came along with it. Throughout America’s history, many people have attempted to create progress in their social, economical, and practical lives as they see fit. This sometimes led to conflicting interests, and the high-stakes nature of their pursuits caused turmoil in the form of turf wars, stemming from each side’s efforts to push for their own goals.
In the stage following the Civil War, Industrialization had many leaders. These leaders helped boom the growth of the economy and the industry in the United States. As historians have looked closer at the people who helped America become one of the leading industrial powers of the world, they’ve come to question the honesty of how these leaders really obtained their fortunes. The industrial and business leaders of the 1865-1900, also known as “Robber Barons, used various methods in order to build up their own wealth and power. These would use mechanisms that would go against the public population more often than not and those that would go near extremes. Historians have delved into the works of multiple men who have looked acceptable on
Overall, I thought that the term Robber Barron to describe Cornelius Vanderbilt was justified. For example, in the article Robber Barons or Captains of Industry, we learned that Vanderbilt was “one who either destroyed his enemies or extracted a ransom in return for leaving a market”. Basically, he was so competitive that he ran other business out of the market in order gain more wealth. Even though he helped the economy with building steamships and providing transportation of goods though the railroad systems he still was looked at in a negative way because of how competitive and ruthless he was.
Four hundred and seventy-five million dollars. This is the overwhelmingly large amount of money Andrew Carnegie acquired during his lifetime. Though not privileged as a boy, he worked his way up the ladder, achieving more than anyone could have ever imagined. Unfortunately, many people were exploited on his way to the top. The extent to which this occurred makes Andrew Carnegie the best, or worst, robber baron of all.
Robber Barons believed in a laissez-faire government. Robber Barons at this time were the wealthy owners of large businesses, and big businesses wanted a laissez-faire government. If the economy was run in a hands off way, it wouldn’t be regulated. Big business owners would not want a regulated economy because it would prevent them from expanding and getting more money. “Among the great misconceptions of the free economy is the widely-held belief that laissez-faire embodies a natural tendency toward monopoly concentration” (Reed). As Lawrence W. Reed points out, the idea that laissez-faire leads to an automatic efficiency monopoly in which companies earn their share of the market because of how good of a job it does compared to other companies in the same industry is false. Robber Barons such as Cornelius Vanderbilt, Andrew Carnegie, and John Rockefeller would have wanted a laissez-faire government because it creates a coercive monopoly. In this type of monopoly, companies bribe the government to give them subsidies or grants of exclusive privilege to make a profit. For example, “Leland Stanford, a former governor and US Senator from California, used his political connections to have the state pass laws prohibiting competition for his Central Pacific Railroad, and he and his business partners profited from this monopoly scheme” (DiLorenzo). Because of the corrupt ways Robber Barons got their wealth, this type of government was perfect for them. The Robber Barons would agree with Thoreau’s quote, because a hands off government would govern very
Judging from the article I read I see the term Robber Barons as a perfectly used term. Before the Civil War people were more of a locally relying group. In the process of the Civil war taking place you start having these men that see an opportunity to making small businesses into big corporations. Now, I did say that the term Robber Baron was over used, but I do believe there was a rise of Robber Baron’s in that time period. Also, if you look at today’s society there is no over using that term the people in the 19th century were not use to people having great wealth and being over these big corporations, well we are.