Intro
I wrote down pretty detailed notes on Dr. Fulsom’s speech, but I really don't think that for this particular speech I need to give much in background and details. I think there were probably several points to Dr. Fulsom’s speech, but the main point that I got from it was that smaller government involvement, privately owned businesses, and entrepreneurs are what are best for the economy. Dr. Fulsom went into great detail on the history of steamships and railroads, and the moral of the story is that people don’t run as good of a business when they are given government subsidies, and at the same time, they rack up national debt. I get that, and the examples that Dr. Fulsom gave were important, because they really were the start of the United States as a superpower. The industrial revolution was key in our success as a country, and I was interested to learn more on the history of it, even if it meant that I had to hear the same “moral of the story” again.
A Little Bit More Background on Fulsom’s Speech
To give a little bit more context, Dr. Fulsom told us the story of Edward Collins, a person in the steamship business, who really felt that he could only start up with the help of the United States government. The United States was desperate to kick the economy up and to have better and faster communication, so they gave Collins a subsidy. Collins continued to ask for subsidies year after year, and he racked up a good bit of national debt, accounting for over 10 million of the 30 million the United States had in total debt. The problem was that Collins was eventually not the only one in the steamship business. He went against Cornelius Vanderbilt, who ended up surpassing Collins in the steamship business, without a government subsidy. I think the lesson is that without government help, you are less inclined to cut corners, as it is your own money on the line. At least, that’s what I understood from it. If you constantly rely on subsidies to fund your business, then why would you be incentivized to do better? Vanderbilt surpassed Collins in business, because he made his steamships faster, cheaper for customers, and he even provided luxuries like food… oh, and he wasn’t crashing his ships and killing people in the process.
What Would the Founders Think?
Dr. Fulsom explained that before the subsidy was given to Collins, many were skeptical. He said that many were arguing if giving government money to something like this would even be constitutional. Fulsom explains that the founding fathers meant for the United States to be limited in government so that entrepreneurs would flourish. And flourish they did… after the first government subsidy was given. Or at least, that’s how Dr. Fulsom made it seem. Obviously, for a while, after the whole Collins debacle went down, the government said “no” to subsidies and relied on entrepreneurs and businesspeople to step it up, and they did; but what about before the steamships? Did the government subsidies somehow encourage a great amount of industrial change in the United States? I think that even though circumstances weren’t great, and that even though we racked up a great deal of debt, it seems like if we hadn’t given the money to Collins, there would never have been a kickstart to the industrial revolution in the United States. Don’t get me wrong, I completely agree that in this case, Vanderbilt was the clear winner, and that railroads should have been privately built, but what would have happened had the government never given Collins the money?
Final Thoughts
What do I think about all this? I don’t know. I mean, Dr. Fulsom was a great speaker, and he was somehow very persuasive to me without having said a word on the “moral of the story”. But I get it, because we’ve been talking about this all semester. I think the government should be there when we need it. Did we need it in the moment that the United States was behind everyone else economically? I think so. But after that incident, the United States did great economically without a need for subsidies, so in that time, we didn’t need government; but maybe sometimes we do, you know? The documentary “Poverty Inc.” had me thinking about the government’s role in our lives, and one of the things that came up was emergency relief. That’s a big one, and I think it’s important. But funding businesses? Eh… maybe not.