We were supposed to analyze the four politician's views and solutions, so without further ado(thank you, in advance!):
The Great Depression was unexpected, yet inevitable. The stock market prices were inflated to nearly breaking point, but there were no actions to show for it. Eventually, people started to realize nothing was resulting from all the stock buying - and panicked. Everyone started selling as much as they could, as fast as they could so they could still make some profit. The major economic figures of the time tried to sustain the stock market by investing all they could, but to no avail - the prices took a huge tumble, and it would be a long time before they would manage to rise up again. "The Depression altered established perceptions of the economy and the role of the state."1 Several influential political figures - J. S. Woodsworth, W. L. M. King, William Aberhart, and R. B. Bennett - had strong opinions regarding the correct course of action for the Great Depression. Some of these ideas were new, and required a good deal of 'faith', such as Aberhart's, and King's. Others were more rational, with a detailed plan in mind, like Woodsworth's, and Bennett's. People finally understood that the carefree days of the 20s were gone, and they needed some sort of direction in order to recover from this catastrophe.
William Aberhart had the most radical idea of the four politicians. Aberhart was the Social Credit Premier of Alberta from 1935 to 1943. His explanation for the Great Depression was that people simply did not have enough money to sustain themselves. Therefore, his suggestion was to give everybody $25 a month, to purchase necessities. According to Aberhart, if every citizen received $25, then the whole economic system could be saved. The employers would have money, so they wouldn't have to lay off any workers; the workers would have money so they would be able to purchase consumer products, and so on. This proposition was obviously quite flawed: how many of the citizens would really use the money to buy 'necessities'? How much of the government's money would be wasted before they realized this was not going to work? Thankfully, the citizens of Canada(or rather, Alberta) never found out - Aberhart's idea of 'Social Credit' never did garner much reception, and so he did not have a chance to put his idea into play.
James Shaver Woodsworth was the first leader of the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation(CCF), which was:
... a political coalition of progressive, socialist, and labour forces anxious to establish a political vehicle capable of bringing about economic reforms to improve the circumstances of those suffering the effects of the Great Depression.2
Woodsworth believed the Great Depression was a result of citizens given too much free rein. He wished for the government to step in and take control. With the government to influence the economy, inflation would be suppressed, interest rates would be kept low, and everyone would be happy - or so Woodsworth claimed. Not only would the government control formerly privatized banks, they would also implement policies such as unemployment insurance, welfare, pension, and compensation. This plan relied heavily on a 'trustworthy' government, since all economic matters would be taken care of by the current political party in rule. If the government was 'corrupt', or if they didn't put enough attention on issues of concern, once again, the country would be in trouble. Woodsworth had a good idea that could work out to save the economy - but only if the government was very careful.
William Lyon Mackenzie King was the prime minister of Canada (of the Liberal Party) - from 1921-1926, 1926-1930, and 1935-1948. "Just prior to the election, King blundered badly by carelessly responding to criticism over his handling of the economic crisis."3 By doing so, he lost the election of 1930 and the government went to R. B. Bennett's Conservatives. King's proposition did not have much strategic basis. He asked citizens for patience, and he suggested lowering taxes. Lowering taxes would not aid the economy at all, in fact, it would make it even worse. Without enough tax money, the government would not be able to do anything in a crisis. This scheme seemed to be almost the exact opposite of Woodsworth's socialist one. King's idea was evidently not one he had thought too much about - at a time when everyone was panicking, this was not the reassuring message citizens wanted to hear from their Prime Minister.
Richard Bedford Bennett of the Conservative Party became the Prime Minister of Canada after beating the Liberals in 1930. Bennett thought the Depression was caused by Canadians buying goods from other countries rather than Canada, and proposed tariffs to solve this problem:
In office Bennett proceeded to launch a modest public works program to provide employment, but his major response to Depression conditions was to increase the tariff to unprecedented levels, followed by an initiative which led to the establishment of preferential tariff arrangements within the British Empire. These policies probably further restricted Canadian export trade and increased the burden of the Depression on those who already felt it most. Such policies, the arbitrary treatment of protesters, and the apparent cold aloofness of the bachelor-millionaire prime minister made Bennett an increasingly unpopular leader.4
Bennett has quoted Abraham Lincoln5 as saying:
I am not a learned man. I know nothing of economics, and when you to talk to me about tariffs and economics I do not quite understand: but this I do know, that when I was a boy the steel rails for the railroads then being built in America were made in Belgium and Germany and England, and the Belgian, the German and the Englishman got the price for them and did the work, and we got the rails. Our Congress put on something called a tariff, and as a result we have the rails and we have the work and we have the money, too.
This shows Bennett had the belief that Canada's economy could be saved if high tariffs were imposed on foreign goods. Ridiculous tariffs meant people would be pressured to purchase cheaper Canadian goods, and so Canadian businesses and factories would benefit. Nowadays, that would seem like a pretty logical idea, but the people in the 1930s weren't ready for change. They didn't want to buy Canadian items, but nor did they want to pay more for the items they'd always bought at the same price for years. Perhaps the reason Bennett's idea failed in the end was because Canadians were just too stubborn and traditional to conform to this fairly modern plan.
After such a prosperous and happy decade, Canadians were hit hard by the Great Depression, and the problems it brought along. Aberhart seemed to have unrealistic expectations for the 'morals' of people - he assumed, in his plan, that the citizens would use the money purely for 'necessities' and not for anything else. King did not bother making a serious proposition - he wanted citizens to be patient, and wait it out. When pressured to make an 'actual' plan, his only idea was to lower taxes, which would have harmed the already beaten economy. Bennett's idea had potential - however, increasing tariffs meant Canadian businesses had less competition, therefore price-lowering wouldn't be a priority. During the Depression, when people were desperate and needed items as cheap as they could get, this plan just wasn't going to succeed. Whether Canadians were too stubborn to listen, or another unknown reason, Bennett's plan failed. Out of the four politicians, Woodsworth seemed to have the most well thought out and successful plan. While Aberhart's, King's, and Bennett's ideas seemed to fizzle when put into action, the CCF's socialist scheme seemed to work... and, on a different level, still does today. As the government shaped society to be what it is now, it's only fair that they should be allowed to step in and make sure rules are regulated once in a while. The government cannot function without its citizens, that's true - however, nor can the citizens function without the government.
*There are a few direct block quotations, footnotes for sourcing and such that did not copy so well, but you get the drift.
The Great Depression was unexpected, yet inevitable. The stock market prices were inflated to nearly breaking point, but there were no actions to show for it. Eventually, people started to realize nothing was resulting from all the stock buying - and panicked. Everyone started selling as much as they could, as fast as they could so they could still make some profit. The major economic figures of the time tried to sustain the stock market by investing all they could, but to no avail - the prices took a huge tumble, and it would be a long time before they would manage to rise up again. "The Depression altered established perceptions of the economy and the role of the state."1 Several influential political figures - J. S. Woodsworth, W. L. M. King, William Aberhart, and R. B. Bennett - had strong opinions regarding the correct course of action for the Great Depression. Some of these ideas were new, and required a good deal of 'faith', such as Aberhart's, and King's. Others were more rational, with a detailed plan in mind, like Woodsworth's, and Bennett's. People finally understood that the carefree days of the 20s were gone, and they needed some sort of direction in order to recover from this catastrophe.
William Aberhart had the most radical idea of the four politicians. Aberhart was the Social Credit Premier of Alberta from 1935 to 1943. His explanation for the Great Depression was that people simply did not have enough money to sustain themselves. Therefore, his suggestion was to give everybody $25 a month, to purchase necessities. According to Aberhart, if every citizen received $25, then the whole economic system could be saved. The employers would have money, so they wouldn't have to lay off any workers; the workers would have money so they would be able to purchase consumer products, and so on. This proposition was obviously quite flawed: how many of the citizens would really use the money to buy 'necessities'? How much of the government's money would be wasted before they realized this was not going to work? Thankfully, the citizens of Canada(or rather, Alberta) never found out - Aberhart's idea of 'Social Credit' never did garner much reception, and so he did not have a chance to put his idea into play.
James Shaver Woodsworth was the first leader of the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation(CCF), which was:
... a political coalition of progressive, socialist, and labour forces anxious to establish a political vehicle capable of bringing about economic reforms to improve the circumstances of those suffering the effects of the Great Depression.2
Woodsworth believed the Great Depression was a result of citizens given too much free rein. He wished for the government to step in and take control. With the government to influence the economy, inflation would be suppressed, interest rates would be kept low, and everyone would be happy - or so Woodsworth claimed. Not only would the government control formerly privatized banks, they would also implement policies such as unemployment insurance, welfare, pension, and compensation. This plan relied heavily on a 'trustworthy' government, since all economic matters would be taken care of by the current political party in rule. If the government was 'corrupt', or if they didn't put enough attention on issues of concern, once again, the country would be in trouble. Woodsworth had a good idea that could work out to save the economy - but only if the government was very careful.
William Lyon Mackenzie King was the prime minister of Canada (of the Liberal Party) - from 1921-1926, 1926-1930, and 1935-1948. "Just prior to the election, King blundered badly by carelessly responding to criticism over his handling of the economic crisis."3 By doing so, he lost the election of 1930 and the government went to R. B. Bennett's Conservatives. King's proposition did not have much strategic basis. He asked citizens for patience, and he suggested lowering taxes. Lowering taxes would not aid the economy at all, in fact, it would make it even worse. Without enough tax money, the government would not be able to do anything in a crisis. This scheme seemed to be almost the exact opposite of Woodsworth's socialist one. King's idea was evidently not one he had thought too much about - at a time when everyone was panicking, this was not the reassuring message citizens wanted to hear from their Prime Minister.
Richard Bedford Bennett of the Conservative Party became the Prime Minister of Canada after beating the Liberals in 1930. Bennett thought the Depression was caused by Canadians buying goods from other countries rather than Canada, and proposed tariffs to solve this problem:
In office Bennett proceeded to launch a modest public works program to provide employment, but his major response to Depression conditions was to increase the tariff to unprecedented levels, followed by an initiative which led to the establishment of preferential tariff arrangements within the British Empire. These policies probably further restricted Canadian export trade and increased the burden of the Depression on those who already felt it most. Such policies, the arbitrary treatment of protesters, and the apparent cold aloofness of the bachelor-millionaire prime minister made Bennett an increasingly unpopular leader.4
Bennett has quoted Abraham Lincoln5 as saying:
I am not a learned man. I know nothing of economics, and when you to talk to me about tariffs and economics I do not quite understand: but this I do know, that when I was a boy the steel rails for the railroads then being built in America were made in Belgium and Germany and England, and the Belgian, the German and the Englishman got the price for them and did the work, and we got the rails. Our Congress put on something called a tariff, and as a result we have the rails and we have the work and we have the money, too.
This shows Bennett had the belief that Canada's economy could be saved if high tariffs were imposed on foreign goods. Ridiculous tariffs meant people would be pressured to purchase cheaper Canadian goods, and so Canadian businesses and factories would benefit. Nowadays, that would seem like a pretty logical idea, but the people in the 1930s weren't ready for change. They didn't want to buy Canadian items, but nor did they want to pay more for the items they'd always bought at the same price for years. Perhaps the reason Bennett's idea failed in the end was because Canadians were just too stubborn and traditional to conform to this fairly modern plan.
After such a prosperous and happy decade, Canadians were hit hard by the Great Depression, and the problems it brought along. Aberhart seemed to have unrealistic expectations for the 'morals' of people - he assumed, in his plan, that the citizens would use the money purely for 'necessities' and not for anything else. King did not bother making a serious proposition - he wanted citizens to be patient, and wait it out. When pressured to make an 'actual' plan, his only idea was to lower taxes, which would have harmed the already beaten economy. Bennett's idea had potential - however, increasing tariffs meant Canadian businesses had less competition, therefore price-lowering wouldn't be a priority. During the Depression, when people were desperate and needed items as cheap as they could get, this plan just wasn't going to succeed. Whether Canadians were too stubborn to listen, or another unknown reason, Bennett's plan failed. Out of the four politicians, Woodsworth seemed to have the most well thought out and successful plan. While Aberhart's, King's, and Bennett's ideas seemed to fizzle when put into action, the CCF's socialist scheme seemed to work... and, on a different level, still does today. As the government shaped society to be what it is now, it's only fair that they should be allowed to step in and make sure rules are regulated once in a while. The government cannot function without its citizens, that's true - however, nor can the citizens function without the government.
*There are a few direct block quotations, footnotes for sourcing and such that did not copy so well, but you get the drift.
Do You Need