Lincoln had a good grasp on monetary policy, so why did he resort to violence

E

EndTheFedttt

New member
Joined
Nov 14, 2008
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Points
1
when capitalism = end of slavery? Capitalism could have ended slavery. The Civil War was NOT necessary to end slavery. Capitalism would have done it peacefully. Why? Slavery was very inefficient.

The fundamental difference between free and slave labor is that a freemen have an incentive to produce as much as possible. Whereas the slave will most likely perform at the bare minimum necessary to avoid punishment. For this reason slave labor, as an institution, is inferior to an economy based on free labor. A free market economy will always perform better than a slave economy because a slave economy cannot compete in a market that values quality goods.

Lincoln knew what the private banking cartels were up to and printed his own money to undermine their lawless greed. By doing so, he obviously had a good understanding of economics. So why would he resort to something so brutal as declaring War on his own country when a stance on monetary policy would yield the same results?

(a great 10-min vid on past presidents' fight with the central banking cartels: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USGSOViaulc )
@hi: wow....that's what you got out of my details? Why don't you re-read my points on how slavery would have become extinct thanks to free-market labor.....
@desdamona: lol, what!? "I'm" a liberal? HAHAHAHAH.... "I am so sick and tired of all of the insipid liberal (stupid) rants against Palin and Beck, and Bush #43 " ...where did that come from? Where did YOU come from anyway?

If posing to be a conservative, you should bring more intellect to the table... as No religion in this pub has demonstrated.

My questions are sometimes based on curiosity and are usually intended to be thought-provoking. ...but apparently you're too smart for that.
 
Because slavery was a secondary issue too both the south and the north in the civil war. Lincoln, though he did not openly support Congressmen Corwins legislation, that would amend the Constitution to protect the institution of slavery, did not oppose it either. Lincoln, even addressed the Amendment issue during his first inauguration saying that he would not oppose the amendment if approved by the states. According to Austrian Economist and Author of the Real Lincoln. "Lincoln,being an old Whig, was in support of a national bank, high protective tariffs, and the chartering of businesses for internal improvements. This of course was the primary reason of why the South seceded from the Union. Lincoln, signed into law the currency ACTS of 1863 and 1864 that created a system that chartered national banks and put a 10% tax on notes issued by private banks." Lincoln, himself was a big government schill.


As for slavery, I believe that it would have ended with out Lincoln enslaving Americans in the north and immigrants through the draft process and, sending them to an almost certain death. Slavery in comparison with free labor is much more costly and inefficient. With slavery, the owner has to make sure the slave does not run off, feed him, cloth him, provide shelter, give him some sort of health care. All of which gets extremely expensive. The slave owner couldn't send a slave home for the day and expect him to come back tomorrow! Where as with a laborer the employer could expect him to return the next day for work with out coercion and would only have to provide him with a wage that was predetermined when he was hired.
 
Because slavery was a secondary issue too both the south and the north in the civil war. Lincoln, though he did not openly support Congressmen Corwins legislation, that would amend the Constitution to protect the institution of slavery, did not oppose it either. Lincoln, even addressed the Amendment issue during his first inauguration saying that he would not oppose the amendment if approved by the states. According to Austrian Economist and Author of the Real Lincoln. "Lincoln,being an old Whig, was in support of a national bank, high protective tariffs, and the chartering of businesses for internal improvements. This of course was the primary reason of why the South seceded from the Union. Lincoln, signed into law the currency ACTS of 1863 and 1864 that created a system that chartered national banks and put a 10% tax on notes issued by private banks." Lincoln, himself was a big government schill.


As for slavery, I believe that it would have ended with out Lincoln enslaving Americans in the north and immigrants through the draft process and, sending them to an almost certain death. Slavery in comparison with free labor is much more costly and inefficient. With slavery, the owner has to make sure the slave does not run off, feed him, cloth him, provide shelter, give him some sort of health care. All of which gets extremely expensive. The slave owner couldn't send a slave home for the day and expect him to come back tomorrow! Where as with a laborer the employer could expect him to return the next day for work with out coercion and would only have to provide him with a wage that was predetermined when he was hired.
 
The liberal professors spitting out garbage that you decide to accept I see. Funny, how you do not know that you cannot judge history by what is now known 150 years LATER!
Hey, clueless,
the Civil War was fought over secession. The Southern states depended on an agricultural economy, the northern states were operating on a market economy. More states were coming into the union, the Southern states wanted them to have slavery, the Northern states said "no way."
Bottom line: Could the Southern States secede from the Union?
Answer Per Lincoln: NO. (See the Pledge of Allegiance IF you even know what "indivisible" means.) You just brought the collective IQ of this place down 40 points. And you know, I am so sick and tired of all of the insipid liberal (stupid) rants against Palin and Beck, and Bush #43 who do not even hold office! Build the mosque, re-elect Barry O., become socialists, and let all of the ILLEGAL immigrants in, let Obama let BP continue to poison our Gulf. You liberals are clueless, stupid, stupid, idiots. You know what? Let's let the illegals in, and throw y'all asses out See ya.

Got that right, you eat that liberal professor crap up, or your stupid teacher's crap...I am too smart, especially for YOU. That is the STUPIDIST question and
"thought provoking" comments I have EVER read ANYWHERE on the Civil War. I am so sorry that you couldn't make it through the 11th grade.
 
Back
Top