Informative Speech Outline
Dominick Lestingi
Dr. Kallina
AMH 2020
August 9th, 2013
Paper 1 The definition for Robber Barons may have a different meaning depending on what historical perspective one examines it from. If a distinction is made between market entrepreneurs and a political entrepreneurs, it is easier to understand the true meaning. Someone who attempts to succeed through aid from the government, paying off politicians, or creating pools should be considered a political entrepreneur. If an individual finds success by producing better products and selling them at cheaper cost, he/she ought to be considered a market entrepreneur. So, a Robber Baron is a businessperson who slowed innovation, misused government support and developed monopolies or pools of capital to satisfy needs. The myth of the Robber Baron is that the rich continued getting richer and the poor stayed poor. The myth states that these wealthy individuals held on to their assets at the expense of others. In actuality, the rise of big businesses and corporations led to many opportunities for the working man. Some businessmen deserve the title of Robber Baron; Folsom argues, such as Edward Collins and Henry Villard. Others, he insists, deserve credit for “decisive and unpredictable contributions to American economic development.” Two of these men are James Hill and John Rockefeller. As market entrepreneurs, they found success through skill, efficiency and vision. During the steamship competition between The United States and England, a political entrepreneur named Edward Collins received a federal subsidy of $3,000,000 down and an additional $385,000 per year, to race the British fleet. Keeping in mind that efficiency nor time was not a key priority, Collins did not have incentive to outperform opponents as long as the government funds kept refunding his rising costs. As a true Robber Baron would, Collins chose to lobby for more government assistance rather than cutting prices or challenging his business
Dr. Kallina
AMH 2020
August 9th, 2013
Paper 1 The definition for Robber Barons may have a different meaning depending on what historical perspective one examines it from. If a distinction is made between market entrepreneurs and a political entrepreneurs, it is easier to understand the true meaning. Someone who attempts to succeed through aid from the government, paying off politicians, or creating pools should be considered a political entrepreneur. If an individual finds success by producing better products and selling them at cheaper cost, he/she ought to be considered a market entrepreneur. So, a Robber Baron is a businessperson who slowed innovation, misused government support and developed monopolies or pools of capital to satisfy needs. The myth of the Robber Baron is that the rich continued getting richer and the poor stayed poor. The myth states that these wealthy individuals held on to their assets at the expense of others. In actuality, the rise of big businesses and corporations led to many opportunities for the working man. Some businessmen deserve the title of Robber Baron; Folsom argues, such as Edward Collins and Henry Villard. Others, he insists, deserve credit for “decisive and unpredictable contributions to American economic development.” Two of these men are James Hill and John Rockefeller. As market entrepreneurs, they found success through skill, efficiency and vision. During the steamship competition between The United States and England, a political entrepreneur named Edward Collins received a federal subsidy of $3,000,000 down and an additional $385,000 per year, to race the British fleet. Keeping in mind that efficiency nor time was not a key priority, Collins did not have incentive to outperform opponents as long as the government funds kept refunding his rising costs. As a true Robber Baron would, Collins chose to lobby for more government assistance rather than cutting prices or challenging his business