document_title: Great Depression in the United States

question_text: n the depth of the great depression the unemployment rate in the united states was about

text: Great Depression in the United States

text: Stock market crash[edit]

text: The Wall Street Crash of 1929 is often cited as the beginning of the Great Depression. It began on October 24, 1929, and was the most devastating stock market crash in the history of the United States. Much of the stock market crash can be attributed to exuberance and false expectations. In the years leading up to 1929, the rising stock market prices had created vast sums of wealth for those invested, in turn encouraging borrowing to further buy more stock. However, on October 24 (Black Thursday), share prices began to fall and panic selling caused prices to fall sharply. On October 29 (Black Tuesday), share prices fell by $14 billion in a single day, more than $30 billion in the week. [9] The value that evaporated the week was 10x more than the entire federal budget and more than all of what the U.S. spent on World War I. By 1930 the value of shares had fallen by 90%. [10]

text: Since many banks had also invested their clients' savings in the stock market, these banks were forced to close when the stock market crashed. After the stock market crash and the bank closures, people were too afraid to lose more money. Because of the fears of further economic challenge, individuals from all classes stopped purchasing and consuming. Thousands of individual investors who believed they could get rich by investing on margin lost everything they had. The stock market crash severely impacted American economy.

text: Banking failures[edit]

text: A large contribution to the recession is due to the closure and suspension of thousands of banks across the country. The causation of these failing financial institutions come from several reasons including unregulated lending procedures, confidence in the Gold standard, consumer confidence in future economics, and agricultural defaults on outstanding loans. With these compacting issues the banking system struggled to keep up with the high demand of cash withdraws from the public. This impact overall decreased the money supply and forced the banks to result to short sale (real estate) and liquidation of existing loans.[8] In the race to liquidate assets the banking system began to fail on a wide scale. In November 1930 the first major banking crisis begun with over 800 banks closing their doors by January 1931; over 2100 banks will be suspended by October 1931, with the highest suspension rate recorded in the St. Louis Federal Reserve District with 2 out of every 5 banks suspended.[11] The economy in whole experienced a massive reduction in banking footholds across the country amounting to more than nine thousand closed banks by 1933.

text: The closures resulted in a massive withdraw of deposits by millions of Americans estimated near $6.8 billion (equivalent to around $60 billion in today's dollars). During this time the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) was not in place resulting in a loss of roughly $1.36 billion (or 20%) of the total $6.8 billion accounted for within the failed banks. These losses will come directly from everyday individuals savings, investments, and daily banking accounts. GDP will fall as a result from the high seven-hundreds in 1929 to the low mid six-hundreds in 1933 before seeing any recovery for the first time in nearly 4 years.[12] Federal leadership intervention is highly debated on its effectiveness and overall participation. The Federal Reserve Act could not effectively tackle the banking crisis as state bank and trust companies were not compelled to be a member, paper eligible discount member banks heavily restricted access to the fed, power between the twelve federal reserve banks was decentralized and federal level leadership were ineffective, inexperienced, and weak.

text: Unregulated growth[edit]

text: Throughout the early 1900s banking regulations were extremely lax if not non-existent. The Currency Act of 1900 lowered the required capital of investors from 50,000 to 25,000 to create a national bank. As a result of this change nearly two thirds of the banks formed over the next ten years were quite small, averaging just above the 25,000 in required capital.[13] The number of banks will nearly double (number of banks divided by Real GDP) from 1890 to 1920 due to the lack of oversight and qualification when banking charters were being issued in the first two decades of the 1900s.[14]

text: The unregulated growth of small rural banking institutions can be partially attributed to the rising cost of agriculture especially in the Corn Belt and Cotton Belt. Throughout the corn and cotton belts real estate increases drove the demand for more local funding to continue to supply rising agricultural economics. The rural banking structures would supply the needed capital to meet the farm commodity market, however, this came with a price of reliability and low risk lending. Economic growth was promising from 1887 to 1920 with an on average of 6 percent growth in [GDP]. In particular the participation in World War I drove a booming agricultural market that drove optimism at the consumer and lending level, which in turn, resulted in a laxer approach in the lending process. Overbanked conditions existed which pressured struggling banking locations to increase their services (specifically to the agricultural customers) without any additional regulatory oversight or qualifications. This dilemma introduced several high risk and marginal business returns to the banking market.[15] Banking growth would continue through the first two decades well outside of previous trends disregarding the current economic and population standards. Banking profitability and loan standards begin to deteriorate as early as 1900 as a result; adding to the agriculture shock and Great Depression to follow.

text: Crop failures beginning in 1921 began to impact this poorly regulated system, the expansion areas of corn and cotton suffered the largest due to the dust bowl era resulting in real estate value reductions. In addition, the year 1921 was the peak for banking expansion with roughly 31,000 banks in activity, however, with the failures at the agricultural level 505 banks would close between 1921 -1930 marking the largest banking system failure on record. Regulatory questions began to hit the debating table around banking qualifications as a result; discussions would continue into the [Great Depression] as not only were banks failing but some would disappear altogether with no rhyme or reason.[16] The panic of financial crisis would increase in the Great Depression due to the lack of confidence in the regulatory and recovery displayed during the 1920s, this ultimately drove a nation of doubts, uneasiness, and lack of consumer confidence in the banking system.

text: Contagion[edit]

text: With a lack of consumer confidence in the economic direction given by the federal government panic started to spread across the country shortly after the Wall Street Crash of 1929. President Hoover retained the Gold Standard as the country’s currency gauge throughout the following years. As a result, the American shareholders with the majority of the gold reserves began to grow wary of the value of gold in the near future. Europe’s decision to move away from the Gold Standard caused individuals to start to withdraw gold shares and move the investments out of the country or began to horde gold for future investment. The market continued to suffer due to these reactions, and in result caused several of the everyday individuals to speculate on the economy in the coming months. Rumors of market stability and banking conditions began to spread, consumer confidence continued to drop and panic begin to set in. Contagion spread like wild fire pushing Americans all over the country to withdraw their deposits in mass. This idea would continue from 1929-1933 causing the greatest financial crisis ever seen at the banking level pushing the economic recovery efforts further from resolution. An increase in the currency-deposit ratio and a money stock determinant forced money stock to fall and income to decline. This panic-induced banking failure took a mild recession to a major recession.[17]

text: Whether this caused the Great Depression is still heavily debated due to many other attributing factors. However, it is evident that the banking system suffered massive reductions across the country due to the lack of consumer confidence. As withdraw requests would exceed cash availability banks began conducting steed discount sales such as fire sales and short sales. Due to the inability to immediately determine current value worth these fire sales and short sales would result in massive losses when recuperating any possible revenue for outstanding and defaulted loans. This would allow healthy banks to take advantage of the struggling units forcing additional losses resulting in banks not being able to deliver on depositor demands and creating a failing cycle that would become wide spread.[18] Investment would continue to stay low through the next half decade as the private sector would horde savings due to uncertainty of the future. The federal government would run additional policy changes such as the Check tax, monetary restrictions (including reduction of money supply by burning), High Wage Policy, and The New Deal through the Hoover and Roosevelt administration.

text: The Depression in the cities[edit]

text: One visible effect of the depression was the advent of Hoovervilles, which were ramshackle assemblages on vacant lots of cardboard boxes, tents, and small rickety wooden sheds built by homeless people. Residents lived in the shacks and begged for food or went to soup kitchens. The term was coined by Charles Michelson, publicity chief of the Democratic National Committee, to refer sardonically to President Herbert Hoover whose policies Michelson blamed for the depression.[19]

text: Unemployment reached 25 percent in the worst days of 1932-33, but it was unevenly distributed. Job losses were less severe among women, workers in nondurable industries (such as food and clothing), services and sales workers, and those employed by the government. Unskilled inner city men had much higher unemployment rates. Age also played a factor. Young people had a hard time getting their first job. Men over the age of 45, if they lost their job, would rarely find another one because employers had their choice of younger men. Millions were hired in the Great Depression, but men with weaker credentials were not, and they fell into a long-term unemployment trap. The migration in the 1920s that brought millions of farmers and townspeople to the bigger cities suddenly reversed itself. Unemployment made the cities unattractive, and the network of kinfolk and more ample food supplies made it wise for many to go back.[20] City governments in 1930-31 tried to meet the depression by expanding public works projects, as President Herbert Hoover strongly encouraged. However, tax revenues were plunging, and the cities as well as private relief agencies were totally overwhelmed by 1931; no one was able to provide significant additional relief. People fell back on the cheapest possible relief, including soup kitchens providing free meals to anyone who showed up.[21] After 1933, new sales taxes and infusions of federal money helped relieve the fiscal distress of the cities, but the budgets did not fully recover until 1941.

text: The federal programs launched by Hoover and greatly expanded by President Roosevelt's New Deal used massive construction projects to try to jump start the economy and solve the unemployment crisis. The alphabet agencies ERA, CCC, FERA, WPA and PWA built and repaired the public infrastructure in dramatic fashion, but did little to foster the recovery of the private sector. FERA, CCC and especially WPA focused on providing unskilled jobs for long-term unemployed men.

text: The Democrats won easy landslide victories in 1932 and 1934, and an even bigger one in 1936; the hapless Republican Party seemed doomed. The Democrats capitalized on the magnetic appeal of Roosevelt to urban America. The key groups were low skilled ethnics, especially Catholic, Jewish, and black people. The Democrats promised and delivered in terms of political recognition, labor union membership, and relief jobs. The cities' political machines were stronger than ever, for they mobilized their precinct workers to help families who needed help the most navigate the bureaucracy and get on relief. FDR won the vote of practically every demographic in 1936, including taxpayers, small business and the middle class. However, the Protestant middle class voters turned sharply against him after the recession of 1937-38 undermined repeated promises that recovery was at hand. Historically, local political machines were primarily interested in controlling their wards and citywide elections; the smaller the turnout on election day, the easier it was to control the system. However, for Roosevelt to win the presidency in 1936 and 1940, he needed to carry the electoral college and that meant he needed the largest possible majorities in the cities to overwhelm rural voters. The machines came through for him.[22] The 3.5 million voters on relief payrolls during the 1936 election cast 82% percent of their ballots for Roosevelt. The rapidly growing, energetic labor unions, chiefly based in the cities, turned out 80% for FDR, as did Irish, Italian and Jewish communities. In all, the nation's 106 cities over 100,000 population voted 70% for FDR in 1936, compared to his 59% elsewhere. Roosevelt worked very well with the big city machines, with the one exception of his old nemesis, Tammany Hall in Manhattan. There he supported the complicated coalition built around the nominal Republican Fiorello La Guardia, and based on Jewish and Italian voters mobilized by labor unions.[23]

text: In 1938, the Republicans made an unexpected comeback, and Roosevelt's efforts to purge the Democratic Party of his political opponents backfired badly. The conservative coalition of Northern Republicans and Southern Democrats took control of Congress, outvoted the urban liberals, and halted the expansion of New Deal ideas. Roosevelt survived in 1940 thanks to his margin in the Solid South and in the cities. In the North the cities over 100,000 gave Roosevelt 60% of their votes, while the rest of the North favored Willkie 52%-48%.[24]

text: With the start of full-scale war mobilization in the summer of 1940, the economies of the cities rebounded. Even before Pearl Harbor, Washington pumped massive investments into new factories and funded round-the-clock munitions production, guaranteeing a job to anyone who showed up at the factory gate.[25] The war brought a restoration of prosperity and hopeful expectations for the future across the nation. It had the greatest impact on the cities of the West Coast, especially Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Portland and Seattle.[26]

text: Economic historians led by Price Fishback have examined the impact of New Deal spending on improving health conditions in the 114 largest cities, 1929-1937. They estimated that every additional $153,000 in relief spending (in 1935 dollars, or $1.95 million in year 2000 dollars) was associated with a reduction of one infant death, one suicide, and 2.4 deaths from infectious disease. [27][28]

text: Global comparison of severity[edit]

text: The Great Depression began in the United States of America and quickly spread worldwide.[29] It had severe effects in countries both rich and poor. Personal income, consumption, industrial output, tax revenue, profits and prices dropped, while international trade plunged by more than 50%. Unemployment in the U.S. rose to 25%, and in some countries rose as high as 33%.[30]

text: Cities all around the world were hit hard, especially those dependent on heavy industry. Construction was virtually halted in many countries. Farming and rural areas suffered as crop prices fell by approximately 60%.[31][32] Facing plummeting demand with few alternate sources of jobs, areas dependent on primary sector industries such as grain farming, mining and logging, as well as construction, suffered the most.[33]

text: Most economies started to recover by 1933–34. However, in the U.S. and some others the negative economic impact often lasted until the beginning of World War II, when war industries stimulated recovery.[34]

text: There is little agreement on what caused the Great Depression, and the topic has become highly politicized. At the time the great majority of economists around the world recommended the "orthodox" solution of cutting government spending and raising taxes. However, British economist John Maynard Keynes advocated large-scale government deficit spending to make up for the failure of private investment. No major nation adopted his policies in the 1930s.[35]

text: Europe[edit]

text:
Europe as a whole was badly hit, in both rural and industrial areas. Democracy was discredited and the left often tried a coalition arrangement between Communists and Socialists, who previously had been harsh enemies. Right wing movements sprang up, often following Italy's fascist mode.[36]
As the Great Depression worsened, Labour lost power in Britain and a coalition government dominated by conservatives came to power in 1931, and remained in power until 1945. There were no programs in Britain comparable to the New Deal.
In France, the "Popular Front" government of Socialists with some Communist support, was in power 1936–1938. It launched major programs favoring labor and the working class, but engendered stiff opposition.
Germany during the Weimar Republic had fully recovered and was prosperous in the late 1920s. The Great Depression hit in 1929 and was severe. The political system descended into violence and the Nazis under Hitler came to power through elections in early 1933. Economic recovery was pursued through autarky, pressure on economic partners, wage controls, price controls, and spending programs such as public works and, especially, military spending.
Spain saw mounting political crises that led in 1936–39 to civil war.
In Benito Mussolini's Italy, the economic controls of his corporate state were tightened. The economy was never prosperous.
The Soviet Union was mostly isolated from the world trading system during the 1930s. To force peasants into industrial jobs in the cities, food was stripped from rural areas, and millions died of starvation.

text: Canada and the Caribbean[edit]

text:
In Canada, Between 1929 and 1939, the gross national product dropped 40%, compared to 37% in the U.S. Unemployment reached 28% at the depth of the Depression in 1929 and 1930,[37] while wages bottomed out in 1933.[38] Many businesses closed, as corporate profits of C$396 million in 1929 turned into losses of $98 million in 1933. Exports shrank by 50% from 1929 to 1933. Worst hit were areas dependent on primary industries such as farming, mining and logging, as prices fell and there were few alternative jobs. Families saw most or all of their assets disappear and their debts became heavier as prices fell. Local and provincial government set up relief programs but there was no nationwide New-Deal-like program. The Conservative government of Prime Minister R. B. Bennett retaliated against the Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act by raising tariffs against the U.S. but lowered them on British Empire goods. Nevertheless, the economy suffered. In 1935, Bennett proposed a series of programs that resembled the New Deal; but was defeated in the elections of that year and no such programs were passed.[39]
Cuba and the Caribbean saw its greatest unemployment during the 1930s because of a decline in exports to the U.S., and a fall in export prices.

text: Asia[edit]

text:
China was at war with Japan during most of the 1930s, in addition to internal struggles between Chiang Kai-shek's nationalists and Mao Zedong's communists.
Japan's economy expanded at the rate of 5% of GDP per year after the years of modernization. Manufacturing and mining came to account for more than 30% of GDP, more than twice the value for the agricultural sector. Most industrial growth, however, was geared toward expanding the nation's military power. Beginning in 1937 much of Japan's energy was focused on a large-scale war and occupation of China.

text: Australia and New Zealand[edit]

text:
In Australia, 1930s conservative and Labor-led governments concentrated on cutting spending and reducing the national debt.
In New Zealand, a series of economic and social policies similar to the New Deal were adopted after the election of the first Labour Government in 1935.[40]

text: Tight monetary policy[edit]

text: The stock market crash in the 1929 not only affected the business community and the public’s economic confidence, but also it led to the banking system soon after the turmoil. The boom of the US economy in the 1920s was based on high indebtedness, and the rupture of the debt chain caused by the collapse of the bank had produced widespread and far-reaching adverse effects. It is precisely because of the shaky banking system, the United States was using monetary policy to save the economy that had been severely constrained. The American economist Kindleberger of long-term studying of the Great Depression pointed out that in the 1929, before and after the collapse of the stock market, the Fed lowered interest rates, tried to expand the money supply and eased the financial market tensions for several times, however they were not successful, the fundamental reason was that the relationship between various credit institutions and the community was in a drastic adjustment process, the normal supply channels for money supply were blocked.[41] Later, some economists argued that the Fed should do a large-scale opening market business at that time, but the essence of the statement was that the US government should be quick to implement measures to expand fiscal spending and fiscal deficits, whereas, the essence of this argument was that the US government should be promptly implemented to expand the fiscal spending and the fiscal deficits measures.

text: Hoover Administration gold standard[edit]

text: Between the 1920s and 1930s, The United States began to try the tight money policy to promote economic growth. In terms of the fiscal policy, the US government failed to reach a consensus on the fiscal issue. President Hoover began to expand federal spending, he set up a governmental financial revitalization company to provide emergency assistance to banks and financial institutions that were on the verge of bankruptcy. Hoover's fiscal policy had accelerated the recession. In December 1929, as means of showing government confidence of the economy, Hoover reduced all income tax rates by 1% of 1929 due to the continuing budget surplus. By 1930, the surplus turned into a fast-growing deficit of economic contraction. In 1931, the US federal fiscal revenue and expenditure changed from the financial surplus to deficit for the first time (the deficit was less than 2.8% of GDP). By the end of 1931, Hoover had decided to recommend a large increase in taxes to balance the budget; in addition, Congress approved the tax increase in 1932, a substantial reduction in personal immunity to increase the number of taxpayers, and the interest rates had risen sharply, the lowest marginal rate rose from 25% on taxable income in excess of $100,000 to 63% on taxable income in excess of $1 million as the rates were made much more progressive. Hoover changed his approach to fighting the Depression. He justified his call for more federal assistance by noting that "We used such emergency powers to win the war; we can use them to fight the Depression, the misery, and suffering from which are equally great." This new approach embraced a number of initiatives. Unfortunately for the President, none proved especially effective. Just as important, with the presidential election approaching, the political heat generated by the Great Depression and the failure of Hoover's policies grew only more withering.[42]

text: In terms of the financial reform, since the recession, Hoover had been trying to repair the economy. He founded government agencies to encourage labor harmony and support local public works aid which promoted cooperation of government and business, stabilize prices, and strive to balance the budget. His work focused on indirect relief from individual countries and the private sector, which was reflected in the letter emphasizing "more effective supporting for each national committee" and volunteer service -" appealing for funding" from outside the government.[43] The commitment to maintain the gold standard system prevented the Federal Reserve expanded its money supply operations in 1930 and 1931, and it promoted Hoover's destructive balancing budgetary action to avoid the gold standard system overwhelming the dollar. As the Great Depression became worse, the call raised for increasing in federal intervention and spending. But Hoover refused to allow the federal government to force fixed prices, control the value of the business or manipulate the currency, in contrast, he started to control the dollar price. For official dollar prices, he expanded the credit base through free market operations in federal reserve system to ensure the domestic value of the dollar. He also tended to provide indirect aid to banks or local public works projects, refused to use federal funds to give aid to citizens directly, which will reduce public morale. Instead, he focused on volunteering to raise money.[43] Even though Hoover was a philanthropist before becoming president, his opponents regarded him as not responsible for the citizens. During the administration of Hoover, the US economic policies had moved to activism and interventionism. In his re-election campaign, Hoover tried to persuade the Americans to claim that the measures they requested seemed to be helpful in the short term, but it would be devastating in the long run. Eventually, he was defeated by Franklin Roosevelt in 1932.

text: Consequences of the Hoover policy[edit]

text: In 1929, the Great Depression began, the asset bubble burst, the unemployment rate rose. The following year, most people thought that nothing is worth worrying about, Hoover had taken decisive action on issues such as employment, construction, public construction and agriculture, which backed the public confidence. The unemployed population rose, although it less than 9%.

text: In 1931, "the tragic year", politicians and economists were convinced that the economy will recover in 1931, but a serious economic crisis and depression happened this year. In a critical atmosphere, at the Congress meeting in 1932, Hoover prepared to take more vigorous measures in the government work report that he submitted to the Congress. First, Hoover affirmed his own achievements over the past two years. Due to Hoover policy led financial spending increased and financial difficulties, Hoover decided to increase taxes.

text: Roosevelt Administration gold standard[edit]

text: At the beginning of 1933, the last few weeks of Hoover's term, the American financial system was paralyzed. The Great Depression was extended by the interventionist policy for four years. Bank crisis caused the serious deflationary pressures. For this phenomenon, Hoover still wanted to stop it. In fact, the worst period of 1932 – the Great Depression had passed, but the recovery was slow and weak. During the financial crisis of 1933 that culminated in the banking holiday in March 1933, a lot of gold flowed out from the Fed, some of them flow out to individuals and companies in the United States. This domestic loss occurred because individuals and businesses like to deposit metal gold into bank deposits or banknotes, some gold flows to foreign countries, and this external loss occurred because foreign investors were worried about the depreciation of the dollar.[44] Roosevelt understands that the traditional political and financial policy cannot save the United States from the "disaster years", he pursued the "New Deal" to attempt to make up for the United States by administrative means. In the spring and summer of 1933, the Roosevelt government suspended the gold standard. The Emergency Banking Act gave the President the power to control international and domestic gold sports. It also gave the treasury secretary the power to surrender of gold coins and certificates. On April 20, President Roosevelt issued a formal announcement of the moratorium on the gold standard. The announcement prohibited gold exports, and prohibited financial institutions from converting money and deposits into gold coins and ingots. The action prevented the gold outflow. Soon, the Roosevelt government weakened the connection with gold once again. Thomas amendment to the Agricultural Relief Act to the gave to the President power to reduce the dollar's gold content by as much as 50%. The President Roosevelt also used the silver standard instead of gold to exchange dollars, it determined by the price of the bank.[44] In April 1933, Roosevelt decided to abolish the gold standard through the New Deal. He abandoned this traditional monetary policy is mainly due to the big crisis to the original monetary policy failure.[45] And the purpose of his action is to prohibit all exports of gold except for foreign countries, so that the United States can maintain an equal monetary base with the vast majority of countries. The Hoover government stubbornly insisted on using the "sound money" policy who against deficit spending and state relief that only make the economic crisis worsen. Because of this situation Roosevelt forced the implementation of inflation, and used the federal deficit spending to promote employment to enforce relief. The abandon of the gold standard made the Wall Street stock prices quickly increased, Wall Street's stock trading was exceptionally active, with a total of 5 million shares delivered on a day, which is the most active day in the past six months.

text: Political results of the depression[edit]

text:
Periods in United States history

 [hide]

Colonial era
1607–1775

American Revolution
1765–1783

Confederation Period
1783–1788

Federalist Era
1788–1801

Jeffersonian Era
1801–1817

Era of Good Feelings
1817–1825

Jacksonian Era
1825–1849

Civil War Era
1849–1865

Reconstruction Era
1865–1877

Gilded Age
1877–1897

Progressive Era
1897–1920

Roaring Twenties
1920–1929

Great Depression
1929–1939

World War II
1941–1945

Postwar Era
1945–1981

Reagan Era
1981–2009

Timeline

v
t
e

text: Hoover's response[edit]

text: The Hoover Administration attempted to correct the economic situation quickly, but was unsuccessful. Throughout Hoover's presidency, businesses were encouraged to keep wage rates high.[46] President Hoover and many academics believed that high wage rates would maintain a steady level of purchasing power, keeping the economy turning. In December 1929, after the beginning phases of the depression had begun, President Hoover continued to promote high wages. It wasn't until 1931 that business owners began reducing wages in order to stay afloat. Later that year, The Hoover Administration created the Check Tax[47] to generate extra government funding. The tax added a two cent tax to the purchase of all bank checks, directly affecting the common person. This additional cost pushed people away from using checks, so instead the majority of the population increased their usage of cash. Banks had already closed due to cash shortage, but this reaction to the Check Tax rapidly increased the pace.

text: Roosevelt's New Deal[edit]

text: In the "First New Deal" of 1933–34, a wide variety of programs were targeted toward the depression and agriculture in rural areas, in the banking industry, and for the economy as a whole. Relief programs were set up for the long-term unemployed who are routinely passed over whenever new jobs did open up. [48][49] The most popular program was the Civilian Conservation Corps the put young men to work in construction jobs, especially in rural areas. Prohibition was repealed, the filling a campaign pledge and generating new tax revenues for local and state government. A series of relief programs were designed to provide jobs, in cooperation with local governments.

text: The National Recovery Administration (NRA) sought to stimulate demand and provide work and relief through increased government spending. To end deflation the gold standard was suspended and a series of panels comprising business leaders in each industry set regulations which ended what was called "cut-throat competition," believed to be responsible for forcing down prices and profits nationwide.[50] Several Hoover agencies were continued, most notably the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, which provided large-scale financial aid to banks, railroads, and other agencies.[51] Reforms that had never been enacted in the 1920s now took center stage, such as the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) designed to electrify and modernize a very poor, mountainous region in Appalachia.

text: In 1934–36 came the much more controversial "Second New Deal." It featured social security; the Works Progress Administration (WPA), a Very large relief agency for the unemployed run by the federal government; the National Labor Relations Board, Which operated as a strong stimulus to the growth of labor unions. Unemployment fell by ⅔ in Roosevelt's first term (from 25% to 9%, 1933–1937). The second set of reforms launched by the Roosevelt Administration during the same period, which is a responsibility for social welfare with the main legislation —— Social Security Act in 1935. Insurance and poor relief (“public assistance” or “welfare”)are constituent parts of the legislation that provided pensions to the aged, benefit payments to dependent mothers, crippled children and blind people, and unemployment insurance.[52] The Social Security Act still plays a significant role of the American health and human service system so far. Much of the economy had recovered by 1936, but persistent, long-term unemployment lasted until rearmament began for World War II in 1940.[53]

text: The New Deal was, and still is, sharply debated.[54] The business community, with considerable support from such conservative Democrats as Al Smith, launched a crusade against the New Deal, warning that a dangerous man had seized control of the economy and threatened America's conservative traditions.[55] Scholars remain divided as well. When asked whether "as a whole, government policies of the New Deal served to lengthen and deepen the Great Depression," 74% of American university professors specializing in economic history disagreed, 21% agreed with provisos, and 6% fully agreed. Among respondents who taught or studied economic theory, 51% disagreed, 22% agreed with provisos, and 22% fully agreed.[56]

text: Recession of 1937–38[edit]

text: By 1936, all the main economic indicators had regained the levels of the late 1920s, except for unemployment, which remained high. In 1937, the American economy unexpectedly fell, lasting through most of 1938. Production declined sharply, as did profits and employment. Unemployment jumped from 14.3% in 1937 to 19.0% in 1938.[57] A contributing factor to the Recession of 1937 was a tightening of monetary policy by the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve doubled reserve requirements between August 1936 and May 1937[58] leading to a contraction in the money supply.

text: The Roosevelt Administration reacted by launching a rhetorical campaign against monopoly power, which was cast as the cause of the depression, and appointing Thurman Arnold to break up large trusts; Arnold was not effective, and the campaign ended once World War II began and corporate energies had to be directed to winning the war.[59] By 1939, the effects of the 1937 recession had disappeared. Employment in the private sector recovered to the level of the 1936 and continued to increase until the war came and manufacturing employment leaped from 11 million in 1940 to 18 million in 1943.[60]

text: Another response to the 1937 deepening of the Great Depression had more tangible results. Ignoring the pleas of the Treasury Department, Roosevelt embarked on an antidote to the depression, reluctantly abandoning his efforts to balance the budget and launching a $5 billion spending program in the spring of 1938 in an effort to increase mass purchasing power.

text: Business-oriented observers explained the recession and recovery in very different terms from the Keynesian economists. They argued the New Deal had been very hostile to business expansion in 1935–37. They said it had encouraged massive strikes which had a negative impact on major industries and had threatened anti-trust attacks on big corporations. But all those threats diminished sharply after 1938. For example, the antitrust efforts fizzled out without major cases. The CIO and AFL unions started battling each other more than corporations, and tax policy became more favorable to long-term growth.[61]

text: On the other hand, according to economist Robert Higgs, when looking only at the supply of consumer goods, significant GDP growth only resumed in 1946. (Higgs does not estimate the value to consumers of collective goods like victory in war)[62] To Keynesians, the war economy showed just how large the fiscal stimulus required to end the downturn of the Depression was, and it led, at the time, to fears that as soon as America demobilized, it would return to Depression conditions and industrial output would fall to its pre-war levels. The incorrect prediction by Alvin Hansen and other Keynesians that a new depression would start after the war failed to take account of pent-up consumer demand as a result of the Depression and World War.[63]

text: Afterward[edit]

text: The government began heavy military spending in 1940, and started drafting millions of young men that year.[64] By 1945, 17 million had entered service to their country, but that was not enough to absorb all the unemployed. During the war, the government subsidized wages through cost-plus contracts. Government contractors were paid in full for their costs, plus a certain percentage profit margin. That meant the more wages a person was paid the higher the company profits since the government would cover them plus a percentage.[65]

text: Using these cost-plus contracts in 1941–1943, factories hired hundreds of thousands of unskilled workers and trained them, at government expense. The military's own training programs concentrated on teaching technical skills involving machinery, engines, electronics and radio, preparing soldiers and sailors for the post-war economy.[66]

text: Structural walls were lowered dramatically during the war, especially informal policies against hiring women, minorities, and workers over 45 or under 18. (See FEPC) Strikes (except in coal mining) were sharply reduced as unions pushed their members to work harder. Tens of thousands of new factories and shipyards were built, with new bus services and nursery care for children making them more accessible. Wages soared for workers, making it quite expensive to sit at home. Employers retooled so that unskilled new workers could handle jobs that previously required skills that were now in short supply. The combination of all these factors drove unemployment below 2% in 1943.[67]

text: Roosevelt's declining popularity in 1938 was evident throughout the US in the business community, the press, and the Senate and House. Many were labeling the recession the "Roosevelt Recession". In late December 1938, Roosevelt looked to gain popularity with the American people, and try to regain the nation's confidence in the economy. His decision that December to name Harry Hopkins as Secretary of Commerce was an attempt to achieve the confidence he so badly needed. The appointment came as a surprise to most because of Hopkins' lack of business experience, but proved to be vastly important in shaping the years following the recession.[68]

text: Hopkins made it his mission to strengthen ties between the Roosevelt administration and the business community. While Roosevelt believed in complete reform (The New Deal), Hopkins took a more administrative position;[clarification needed] he felt that recovery was imperative and that The New Deal would continue to hinder recovery. With support from Secretary of Agriculture Henry Wallace and Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau, Jr, popular support for recovery, rather than reform, swept the nation. By the end of 1938 reform had been struck down, as no new reform laws were passed.[68]

text: The economy in America was now beginning to show signs of recovery and the unemployment rate was lowering following the abysmal year of 1938. The biggest shift towards recovery, however, came with the decision of Germany to invade France at the beginning of WWII. After France had been defeated, the U.S. economy would skyrocket in the months following. France's defeat meant that Britain and other allies would look to the U.S. for large supplies of materials for the war.[69]

text: The need for these war materials created a huge spurt in production, thus leading to promising amount of employment in America. Moreover, Britain chose to pay for their materials in gold. This stimulated the gold inflow and raised the monetary base, which in turn, stimulated the American economy to its highest point since the summer of 1929 when the depression began.[69]

text: By the end of 1941, before American entry into the war, defense spending and military mobilization had started one of the greatest booms in American history thus ending the last traces of unemployment.[69]

text: Facts and figures[edit]

text:
Fireside Chat 1 On the Banking Crisis

Roosevelt's first Fireside Chat on the Banking Crisis (March 12, 1933)

text: Effects of depression in the U.S.:[70]

text:
13 million people became unemployed. In 1932, 34 million people belonged to families with no regular full-time wage earner.[71]
Industrial production fell by nearly 45% between 1929 and 1932.
Homebuilding dropped by 80% between the years 1929 and 1932.
In the 1920s, the banking system in the U.S. was about $50 billion, which was about 50% of GDP.[72]
From 1929 to 1932, about 5,000 banks went out of business.
By 1933, 11,000 of the US' 25,000 banks had failed.[73]
Between 1929 and 1933, U.S. GDP fell around 30%, the stock market lost almost 90% of its value.[74]
In 1929, the unemployment rate averaged 3%.[75]
In Cleveland, the unemployment rate was 50%; in Toledo, Ohio, 80%.[71]
One Soviet trading corporation in New York averaged 350 applications a day from Americans seeking jobs in the Soviet Union.[76]
Over one million families lost their farms between 1930 and 1934.[71]
Corporate profits had dropped from $10 billion in 1929 to $1 billion in 1932.[71]
Between 1929 and 1932, the income of the average American family was reduced by 40%.[77]
Nine million savings accounts had been wiped out between 1930 and 1933.[71]
273,000 families had been evicted from their homes in 1932.[71]
There were two million homeless people migrating around the country.[71]
Over 60% of Americans were categorized as poor by the federal government in 1933.[71]
In the last prosperous year (1929), there were 279,678 immigrants recorded, but in 1933 only 23,068 came to the U.S.[78][79]
In the early 1930s, more people emigrated from the United States than immigrated to it.[80]
With little economic activity there was scant demand for new coinage. No nickels or dimes were minted in 1932–33, no quarter dollars in 1931 or 1933, no half dollars from 1930 to 1932, and no silver dollars in the years 1929–33.
The U.S. government sponsored a Mexican Repatriation program which was intended to encourage people to voluntarily move to Mexico, but thousands, including some U.S. citizens, were deported against their will. Altogether about 400,000 Mexicans were repatriated.[81]
New York social workers reported that 25% of all schoolchildren were malnourished. In the mining counties of West Virginia, Illinois, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania, the proportion of malnourished children was perhaps as high as 90%.[71]
Many people became ill with diseases such as tuberculosis (TB).[71]
The 1930 U.S. Census determined the U.S. population to be 122,775,046. About 40% of the population was under 20 years old.[82]


document_title: The Federalist Papers

question_text: who wrote the majority of the federalist papers

root

text: The Federalist Papers

text: History[edit]

text: Origins[edit]

text: The Federal Convention sent the proposed Constitution to the Confederation Congress, which in turn submitted it to the states for ratification at the end of September 1787. On September 27, 1787, "Cato" first appeared in the New York press criticising the proposition; "Brutus" followed on October 18, 1787.[6] These and other articles and public letters critical of the new Constitution would eventually become known as the "Anti-Federalist Papers". In response, Hamilton decided to launch a measured defense and extensive explanation of the proposed Constitution to the people of the state of New York. He wrote in Federalist No. 1 that the series would "endeavor to give a satisfactory answer to all the objections which shall have made their appearance, that may seem to have any claim to your attention."[7]

tag: p

text: Hamilton recruited collaborators for the project. He enlisted John Jay, who after four strong essays (Federalist Nos. 2, 3, 4, and 5), fell ill and contributed only one more essay, Federalist No. 64, to the series. He also distilled his case into a pamphlet in the spring of 1788, An Address to the People of the State of New-York; Hamilton cited it approvingly in Federalist No. 85. James Madison, present in New York as a Virginia delegate to the Confederation Congress, was recruited by Hamilton and Jay, and became Hamilton's major collaborator. Gouverneur Morris and William Duer were also apparently considered; Morris turned down the invitation, and Hamilton rejected three essays written by Duer.[8] Duer later wrote in support of the three Federalist authors under the name "Philo-Publius", or "Friend of Publius".

text: Hamilton chose "Publius" as the pseudonym under which the series would be written. While many other pieces representing both sides of the constitutional debate were written under Roman names, Albert Furtwangler contends that "'Publius' was a cut above 'Caesar' or 'Brutus' or even 'Cato.' Publius Valerius was not a late defender of the republic but one of its founders. His more famous name, Publicola, meant 'friend of the people.'"[9] It was not the first time Hamilton had used this pseudonym: in 1778, he had applied it to three letters attacking fellow Federalist Samuel Chase. Chase's patriotism was questioned when Hamilton revealed that Chase had taken advantage of knowledge gained in Congress to try to dominate the flour market.

text: Authorship[edit]

text: At the time of publication the authorship of the articles was a closely guarded secret, though astute observers discerned the identities of Hamilton, Madison, and Jay. Following Hamilton's death in 1804, a list that he had drafted claiming fully two-thirds of the papers for himself became public, including some that seemed more likely the work of Madison (No. 49–58 and 62–63). The scholarly detective work of Douglass Adair in 1944 postulated the following assignments of authorship, corroborated in 1964 by a computer analysis of the text:

text:
Alexander Hamilton (51 articles: No. 1, 6–9, 11–13, 15–17, 21–36, 59–61, and 65–85)
James Madison (29 articles: No. 10, 14, 18–20,[10] 37–58 and 62–63)
John Jay (5 articles: No. 2–5 and 64).

tag: ul

text: A total of 85 articles were written by the three men in a span of ten months under the pseudonym "Publius", in honor of Roman consul Publius Valerius Publicola.[9] Madison is now acknowledged as the father of the Constitution—despite his repeated rejection of this honor during his lifetime.[11] Madison became a leading member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Virginia (1789–1797), Secretary of State (1801–1809), and ultimately the fourth President of the United States.[12] Hamilton, who had been a leading advocate of national constitutional reform throughout the 1780s and represented New York at the Constitutional Convention, in 1789 became the first Secretary of the Treasury, a post he held until his resignation in 1795. John Jay, who had been secretary for foreign affairs under the Articles of Confederation from 1784 through their expiration in 1789, became the first Chief Justice of the United States in 1789, stepping down in 1795 to accept election as governor of New York, a post he held for two terms, retiring in 1801.

text: Publication[edit]

text: The Federalist articles appeared in three New York newspapers: The Independent Journal, the New-York Packet, and the Daily Advertiser, beginning on October 27, 1787. Although written and published with haste, The Federalist articles were widely read and greatly influenced the shape of American political institutions.[13] Between them, Hamilton, Madison and Jay kept up a rapid pace, with at times three or four new essays by Publius appearing in the papers in a week. Garry Wills observes that the pace of production "overwhelmed" any possible response: "Who, given ample time could have answered such a battery of arguments? And no time was given."[14] Hamilton also encouraged the reprinting of the essay in newspapers outside New York state, and indeed they were published in several other states where the ratification debate was taking place. However, they were only irregularly published outside New York, and in other parts of the country they were often overshadowed by local writers.[15]

text: Because the essays were initially published in New York, most of them begin with the same salutation: "To the People of the State of New York".

text: The high demand for the essays led to their publication in a more permanent form. On January 1, 1788, the New York publishing firm J. & A. McLean announced that they would publish the first thirty-six essays as a bound volume; that volume was released on March 2 and was titled The Federalist. New essays continued to appear in the newspapers; Federalist No. 77 was the last number to appear first in that form, on April 2. A second bound volume containing the last forty-nine essays was released on May 28. The remaining eight papers were published in the New York newspapers between June 14 and August 16.[16]

text: A 1792 French edition ended the collective anonymity of Publius, announcing that the work had been written by "MM Hamilton, Maddisson E Gay", citizens of the State of New York. In 1802, George Hopkins published an American edition that similarly named the authors. Hopkins wished as well that "the name of the writer should be prefixed to each number," but at this point Hamilton insisted that this was not to be, and the division of the essays among the three authors remained a secret.[17]

text: The first publication to divide the papers in such a way was an 1810 edition that used a list left by Hamilton to associate the authors with their numbers; this edition appeared as two volumes of the compiled "Works of Hamilton". In 1818, Jacob Gideon published a new edition with a new listing of authors, based on a list provided by Madison. The difference between Hamilton's list and Madison's formed the basis for a dispute over the authorship of a dozen of the essays.[18]

text: Both Hopkins's and Gideon's editions incorporated significant edits to the text of the papers themselves, generally with the approval of the authors. In 1863, Henry Dawson published an edition containing the original text of the papers, arguing that they should be preserved as they were written in that particular historical moment, not as edited by the authors years later.[19]

text: Modern scholars generally use the text prepared by Jacob E. Cooke for his 1961 edition of The Federalist; this edition used the newspaper texts for essay numbers 1–76 and the McLean edition for essay numbers 77–85.[20]

text: Disputed essays[edit]

text: The authorship of seventy-three of The Federalist essays is fairly certain. Twelve of these essays are disputed over by some scholars, though the modern consensus is that Madison wrote essays Nos. 49–58, with Nos. 18–20 being products of a collaboration between him and Hamilton; No. 64 was by John Jay. The first open designation of which essay belonged to whom was provided by Hamilton, who in the days before his ultimately fatal gun duel with Aaron Burr provided his lawyer with a list detailing the author of each number. This list credited Hamilton with a full sixty-three of the essays (three of those being jointly written with Madison), almost three-quarters of the whole, and was used as the basis for an 1810 printing that was the first to make specific attribution for the essays.[21]

text: Madison did not immediately dispute Hamilton's list, but provided his own list for the 1818 Gideon edition of The Federalist. Madison claimed twenty-nine numbers for himself, and he suggested that the difference between the two lists was "owing doubtless to the hurry in which [Hamilton's] memorandum was made out." A known error in Hamilton's list—Hamilton incorrectly ascribed No. 54 to John Jay, when in fact, Jay wrote No. 64—provided some evidence for Madison's suggestion.[22]

text: Statistical analysis has been undertaken on several occasions to try to ascertain the authorship question based on word frequencies and writing styles. Nearly all of the statistical studies show that the disputed papers were written by Madison, although a computer science study theorizes the papers were a collaborative effort.[23][24][25]

text: Influence on the ratification debates[edit]

text: The Federalist Papers were written to support the ratification of the Constitution, specifically in New York. Whether they succeeded in this mission is questionable. Separate ratification proceedings took place in each state, and the essays were not reliably reprinted outside of New York; furthermore, by the time the series was well underway, a number of important states had already ratified it, for instance Pennsylvania on December 12. New York held out until July 26; certainly The Federalist was more important there than anywhere else, but Furtwangler argues that it "could hardly rival other major forces in the ratification contests"—specifically, these forces included the personal influence of well-known Federalists, for instance Hamilton and Jay, and Anti-Federalists, including Governor George Clinton.[26] Further, by the time New York came to a vote, ten states had already ratified the Constitution and it had thus already passed—only nine states had to ratify it for the new government to be established among them; the ratification by Virginia, the tenth state, placed pressure on New York to ratify. In light of that, Furtwangler observes, "New York's refusal would make that state an odd outsider."[27]

text: Only 19 Federalists were elected to New York's ratification convention, compared to the Anti-Federalists' 46 delegates. While New York did indeed ratify the Constitution on July 26, the lack of public support for pro-Constitution Federalists has led historian John Kaminski to suggest that the impact of The Federalist on New York citizens was "negligible".[28]

text: As for Virginia, which only ratified the Constitution at its convention on June 25, Hamilton writes in a letter to Madison that the collected edition of The Federalist had been sent to Virginia; Furtwangler presumes that it was to act as a "debater's handbook for the convention there," though he claims that this indirect influence would be a "dubious distinction."[29] Probably of greater importance to the Virginia debate, in any case, were George Washington's support for the proposed Constitution and the presence of Madison and Edmund Randolph, the governor, at the convention arguing for ratification.

text: Structure and content[edit]

text: In Federalist No. 1, Hamilton listed six topics to be covered in the subsequent articles:

text:
"The utility of the UNION to your political prosperity" – covered in No. 2 through No. 14
"The insufficiency of the present Confederation to preserve that Union" –covered in No. 15 through No. 22
"The necessity of a government at least equally energetic with the one proposed to the attainment of this object" – covered in No. 23 through No. 36
"The conformity of the proposed constitution to the true principles of republican government" – covered in No. 37 through No. 84
"Its analogy to your own state constitution" – covered in No. 85
"The additional security which its adoption will afford to the preservation of that species of government, to liberty and to prosperity" – covered in No. 85.[30]

tag: ol

text: Furtwangler notes that as the series grew, this plan was somewhat changed. The fourth topic expanded into detailed coverage of the individual articles of the Constitution and the institutions it mandated, while the two last topics were merely touched on in the last essay.

text: The papers can be broken down by author as well as by topic. At the start of the series, all three authors were contributing; the first twenty papers are broken down as eleven by Hamilton, five by Madison and four by Jay. The rest of the series, however, is dominated by three long segments by a single writer: No. 21 through No. 36 by Hamilton, No. 37 through 58 by Madison, written while Hamilton was in Albany, and No. 65 through the end by Hamilton, published after Madison had left for Virginia.[31]

text: Opposition to the Bill of Rights[edit]

text: The Federalist Papers (specifically Federalist No. 84) are notable for their opposition to what later became the United States Bill of Rights. The idea of adding a Bill of Rights to the Constitution was originally controversial because the Constitution, as written, did not specifically enumerate or protect the rights of the people, rather it listed the powers of the government and left all that remained to the states and the people. Alexander Hamilton, the author of Federalist No. 84, feared that such an enumeration, once written down explicitly, would later be interpreted as a list of the only rights that people had[citation needed].

text: However, Hamilton's opposition to a Bill of Rights was far from universal. Robert Yates, writing under the pseudonym Brutus, articulated this view point in the so-called Anti-Federalist No. 84, asserting that a government unrestrained by such a bill could easily devolve into tyranny. References in The Federalist and in the ratification debates warn of demagogues of the variety who through divisive appeals would aim at tyranny. The Federalist begins and ends with this issue.[32] In the final paper Hamilton offers "a lesson of moderation to all sincere lovers of the Union, and ought to put them on their guard against hazarding anarchy, civil war, a perpetual alienation of the States from each other, and perhaps the military despotism of a successful demagogue".[33] The matter was further clarified by the Ninth Amendment.

text: Modern approaches and interpretations[edit]

text: Judicial use[edit]

text: Federal judges, when interpreting the Constitution, frequently use The Federalist Papers as a contemporary account of the intentions of the framers and ratifiers.[34] They have been applied on issues ranging from the power of the federal government in foreign affairs (in Hines v. Davidowitz) to the validity of ex post facto laws (in the 1798 decision Calder v. Bull, apparently the first decision to mention The Federalist).[35] By 2000[update], The Federalist had been quoted 291 times in Supreme Court decisions.[36]

text: The amount of deference that should be given to The Federalist Papers in constitutional interpretation has always been somewhat controversial. As early as 1819, Chief Justice John Marshall noted in the famous case McCulloch v. Maryland, that "the opinions expressed by the authors of that work have been justly supposed to be entitled to great respect in expounding the Constitution. No tribute can be paid to them which exceeds their merit; but in applying their opinions to the cases which may arise in the progress of our government, a right to judge of their correctness must be retained."[37] Madison believed The Federalist Papers were the ideas of the Founders and not just mere expressions. In a letter to Thomas Ritchie in 1821, he stated that "the legitimate meaning of the Instrument must be derived from the text itself; or if a key is to be sought elsewhere, it must be not in the opinions or intentions of the Body which planned & proposed the Constitution, but in the sense attached to it by the people in their respective State Conventions where it recd. all the authority which it possesses." [38][39]

text: Complete list[edit]

text: The colors used to highlight the rows correspond to the author of the paper.

text:
#
Date
Title
Author

1
October 27, 1787
General Introduction
Alexander Hamilton

2
October 31, 1787
Concerning Dangers from Foreign Force and Influence
John Jay

3
November 3, 1787
The Same Subject Continued: Concerning Dangers from Foreign Force and Influence
John Jay

4
November 7, 1787
The Same Subject Continued: Concerning Dangers from Foreign Force and Influence
John Jay

5
November 10, 1787
The Same Subject Continued: Concerning Dangers from Foreign Force and Influence
John Jay

6
November 14, 1787
Concerning Dangers from Dissensions Between the States
Alexander Hamilton

7
November 15, 1787
The Same Subject Continued: Concerning Dangers from Dissensions Between the States
Alexander Hamilton

8
November 20, 1787
The Consequences of Hostilities Between the States
Alexander Hamilton

9
November 21, 1787
The Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection
Alexander Hamilton

10
November 22, 1787
The Same Subject Continued: The Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection
James Madison

11
November 24, 1787
The Utility of the Union in Respect to Commercial Relations and a Navy
Alexander Hamilton

12
November 27, 1787
The Utility of the Union In Respect to Revenue
Alexander Hamilton

13
November 28, 1787
Advantage of the Union in Respect to Economy in Government
Alexander Hamilton

14
November 30, 1787
Objections to the Proposed Constitution From Extent of Territory Answered
James Madison

15
December 1, 1787
The Insufficiency of the Present Confederation to Preserve the Union
Alexander Hamilton

16
December 4, 1787
The Same Subject Continued: The Insufficiency of the Present Confederation to Preserve the Union
Alexander Hamilton

17
December 5, 1787
The Same Subject Continued: The Insufficiency of the Present Confederation to Preserve the Union
Alexander Hamilton

18
December 7, 1787
The Same Subject Continued: The Insufficiency of the Present Confederation to Preserve the Union
James Madison[10]

19
December 8, 1787
The Same Subject Continued: The Insufficiency of the Present Confederation to Preserve the Union
James Madison[10]

20
December 11, 1787
The Same Subject Continued: The Insufficiency of the Present Confederation to Preserve the Union
James Madison[10]

21
December 12, 1787
Other Defects of the Present Confederation
Alexander Hamilton

22
December 14, 1787
The Same Subject Continued: Other Defects of the Present Confederation
Alexander Hamilton

23
December 18, 1787
The Necessity of a Government as Energetic as the One Proposed to the Preservation of the Union
Alexander Hamilton

24
December 19, 1787
The Powers Necessary to the Common Defense Further Considered
Alexander Hamilton

25
December 21, 1787
The Same Subject Continued: The Powers Necessary to the Common Defense Further Considered
Alexander Hamilton

26
December 22, 1787
The Idea of Restraining the Legislative Authority in Regard to the Common Defense Considered
Alexander Hamilton

27
December 25, 1787
The Same Subject Continued: The Idea of Restraining the Legislative Authority in Regard to the Common Defense Considered
Alexander Hamilton

28
December 26, 1787
The Same Subject Continued: The Idea of Restraining the Legislative Authority in Regard to the Common Defense Considered
Alexander Hamilton

29
January 9, 1788
Concerning the Militia
Alexander Hamilton

30
December 28, 1787
Concerning the General Power of Taxation
Alexander Hamilton

31
January 1, 1788
The Same Subject Continued: Concerning the General Power of Taxation
Alexander Hamilton

32
January 2, 1788
The Same Subject Continued: Concerning the General Power of Taxation
Alexander Hamilton

33
January 2, 1788
The Same Subject Continued: Concerning the General Power of Taxation
Alexander Hamilton

34
January 5, 1788
The Same Subject Continued: Concerning the General Power of Taxation
Alexander Hamilton

35
January 5, 1788
The Same Subject Continued: Concerning the General Power of Taxation
Alexander Hamilton

36
January 8, 1788
The Same Subject Continued: Concerning the General Power of Taxation
Alexander Hamilton

37
January 11, 1788
Concerning the Difficulties of the Convention in Devising a Proper Form of Government
James Madison

38
January 12, 1788
The Same Subject Continued, and the Incoherence of the Objections to the New Plan Exposed
James Madison

39
January 18, 1788
The Conformity of the Plan to Republican Principles
James Madison

40
January 18, 1788
The Powers of the Convention to Form a Mixed Government Examined and Sustained
James Madison

41
January 19, 1788
General View of the Powers Conferred by the Constitution
James Madison

42
January 22, 1788
The Powers Conferred by the Constitution Further Considered
James Madison

43
January 23, 1788
The Same Subject Continued: The Powers Conferred by the Constitution Further Considered
James Madison

44
January 25, 1788
Restrictions on the Authority of the Several States
James Madison

45
January 26, 1788
The Alleged Danger From the Powers of the Union to the State Governments Considered
James Madison

46
January 29, 1788
The Influence of the State and Federal Governments Compared
James Madison

47
January 30, 1788
The Particular Structure of the New Government and the Distribution of Power Among Its Different Parts
James Madison

48
February 1, 1788
These Departments Should Not Be So Far Separated as to Have No Constitutional Control Over Each Other
James Madison

49
February 2, 1788
Method of Guarding Against the Encroachments of Any One Department of Government
James Madison[40]

50
February 5, 1788
Periodic Appeals to the People Considered
James Madison[40]

51
February 6, 1788
The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between the Different Departments
James Madison[40]

52
February 8, 1788
The House of Representatives
James Madison[40]

53
February 9, 1788
The Same Subject Continued: The House of Representatives
James Madison[40]

54
February 12, 1788
The Apportionment of Members Among the States
James Madison[40]

55
February 13, 1788
The Total Number of the House of Representatives
James Madison[40]

56
February 16, 1788
The Same Subject Continued: The Total Number of the House of Representatives
James Madison[40]

57
February 19, 1788
The Alleged Tendency of the New Plan to Elevate the Few at the Expense of the Many
James Madison[40]

58
February 20, 1788
Objection That The Number of Members Will Not Be Augmented as the Progress of Population Demands Considered
James Madison[40]

59
February 22, 1788
Concerning the Power of Congress to Regulate the Election of Members
Alexander Hamilton

60
February 23, 1788
The Same Subject Continued: Concerning the Power of Congress to Regulate the Election of Members
Alexander Hamilton

61
February 26, 1788
The Same Subject Continued: Concerning the Power of Congress to Regulate the Election of Members
Alexander Hamilton

62
February 27, 1788
The Senate
James Madison[40]

63
March 1, 1788
The Senate Continued
James Madison[40]

64
March 5, 1788
The Powers of the Senate
John Jay

65
March 7, 1788
The Powers of the Senate Continued
Alexander Hamilton

66
March 8, 1788
Objections to the Power of the Senate To Set as a Court for Impeachments Further Considered
Alexander Hamilton

67
March 11, 1788
The Executive Department
Alexander Hamilton

68
March 12, 1788
The Mode of Electing the President
Alexander Hamilton

69
March 14, 1788
The Real Character of the Executive
Alexander Hamilton

70
March 15, 1788
The Executive Department Further Considered
Alexander Hamilton

71
March 18, 1788
The Duration in Office of the Executive
Alexander Hamilton

72
March 19, 1788
The Same Subject Continued, and Re-Eligibility of the Executive Considered
Alexander Hamilton

73
March 21, 1788
The Provision For The Support of the Executive, and the Veto Power
Alexander Hamilton

74
March 25, 1788
The Command of the Military and Naval Forces, and the Pardoning Power of the Executive
Alexander Hamilton

75
March 26, 1788
The Treaty Making Power of the Executive
Alexander Hamilton

76
April 1, 1788
The Appointing Power of the Executive
Alexander Hamilton

77
April 2, 1788
The Appointing Power Continued and Other Powers of the Executive Considered
Alexander Hamilton

78
May 28, 1788 (book)
June 14, 1788 (newspaper)
The Judiciary Department
Alexander Hamilton

79
May 28, 1788 (book)
June 18, 1788 (newspaper)
The Judiciary Continued
Alexander Hamilton

80
June 21, 1788
The Powers of the Judiciary
Alexander Hamilton

81
June 25, 1788 and
June 28, 1788
The Judiciary Continued, and the Distribution of the Judicial Authority
Alexander Hamilton

82
July 2, 1788
The Judiciary Continued
Alexander Hamilton

83
July 5, 1788,
July 9, 1788 and
July 12, 1788
The Judiciary Continued in Relation to Trial by Jury
Alexander Hamilton

84
July 16, 1788,
July 26, 1788 and
August 9, 1788
Certain General and Miscellaneous Objections to the Constitution Considered and Answered
Alexander Hamilton

85
August 13, 1788 and
August 16, 1788
Concluding Remarks
Alexander Hamilton

tag: table


document_title: Love, Rosie (film)

question_text: who does rosie end up with in love rosie

text: Love, Rosie (film)

text: Plot[edit]

text: Alex and Rosie have been best friends for almost as long as they can remember. During Rosie's 18th birthday party, Alex kisses Rosie, who is drunk, and realizes that he has romantic feelings for her. The next day, while nursing a hangover and having had her stomach pumped, Rosie regrets having got drunk, and tells Alex that she wishes that the night had never happened. Alex interprets her words as Rosie just wanting to be friends.

text: Greg, the "fittest guy in their year", asks Rosie to the school dance. While she originally intended to go with Alex, she accepts Greg's offer when she learns that Alex is thinking about going to the dance with a girl named Bethany. After the dance, Rosie has sex with Greg, but the condom slips off inside her.

text: Rosie aspires to one day run her own hotel, and applies and gets accepted to a hotel management course at Boston University. She rushes to tell Alex but finds him having sex with Bethany, which causes her to vomit. Rosie discovers that she is pregnant but refuses to tell Alex, fearing that he will forego his chance to study at Harvard to help take care of her. After Alex leaves for the United States, she gives birth to a daughter, whom she names Katie. Alex learns of Rosie's pregnancy from Bethany and becomes Katie's godfather.

text: Five years later, Rosie visits Alex in Boston and they spend a night together talking and visiting places. The following morning, she discovers that his girlfriend is pregnant. She understands that Alex's living situation was not proper and tries to discuss it with him but he rebuffs her, saying that at least their child will have both parents. Infuriated, Rosie leaves Boston immediately. She reconciles with Greg, who had initially fled to Ibiza upon learning of her pregnancy, and the two eventually marry. Later, Rosie learns that Alex split from his girlfriend after discovering that the baby was not his. She bumps into Bethany, now a famous model, and suggests that Bethany look up Alex on an upcoming trip to the US.

text: Rosie's father dies. Alex attends the funeral, where he reconciles with Rosie. At the same event, Greg behaves immaturely, causing a scene. This later prompts Alex to write Rosie a note saying that she deserves better and that he can be that better man. However, Greg intercepts the note and hides it from Rosie. Later, Rosie discovers that Greg is cheating on her and kicks him out. While disposing of his things, she finds the letter from Alex. She calls him, but discovers that Bethany is living with him now and that the two are engaged. They invite Rosie to be the "best man" at their wedding.

text: Rosie plots to interrupt the wedding, but fails, as the church ceremony is over by the time she arrives. At the reception, Rosie gives a speech, telling Alex that she loves him as a friend. Her daughter, Katie, brings a friend named Toby with her to the wedding, in a friendship that is reminiscent of Rosie and Alex when they were children. During a dance, Toby suddenly kisses Katie, but Katie pushes him away and runs outside. Rosie and Alex follow her. Alex counsels her and tells her to follow her feelings with Toby or she might regret it, alluding to how he felt about Rosie. After a moment, Toby finds Katie and apologizes for what he did. As he asks her to forget what just happened, Katie interrupts him with a kiss. In that moment, Alex learns that Rosie does not remember the kiss that they shared on her 18th birthday. He realizes that he had been mistaken in interpreting her desire to forget that night as her wanting to stay platonic.

text: Years later, Rosie finally fulfills her ambition to start her own hotel. Alex is her second guest. When he arrives, he tells Rosie that he ended his marriage with Bethany, and shares with her a recurring dream he has had about the two of them being together. Finally, they kiss.

text: Cast[edit]

text:
Lily Collins as Rosie Dunne
Beau Rose Garratt as Rosie (6 years old)
Lara McDonnell as Rosie (10 years old)
Sam Claflin as Alex Stewart
Tighe Wardell as Alex (6 years old)
Tom John Kelly as Alex (10 years old)
Tamsin Egerton as Sally
Suki Waterhouse as Bethany Williams
Jaime Winstone as Ruby
Christian Cooke as Greg
Lily Laight as Katie Dunne
Rose Molloy as Katie (5 years old)
Nick Lee as Herb
Nick Hardin as Joe American
Jamie Beamish as Phil
Art Parkinson as Gary Dünnen

text: Reception[edit]

text: Love, Rosie received negative reviews from critics. Rotten Tomatoes gives it a score of 31% based on reviews from 52 critics, with an average rating of 4.6/10. The site's consensus states: "Lilly Collins and Sam Claflin are appealing, and they give it their all, but they're undone by Love, Rosie's silly, clichéd storyline."[2] Metacritic gives it a of 44/100 based on reviews from 16 critics.[3]

text: Donald Clarke writing for The Irish Times describes Lily Collins as "perfectly charming" but complains "entire film is weighed down by such sloppy storytelling and by equally disordered characterisation" and gives the film 1 out 5 stars calling the film awful, but pretty.[4]

text: Production[edit]

text: Filming began in May 2013 in Toronto before moving to Dublin.[5]