<p>Was University of Chicago’s fine patron a robber baron or captain of industry?
Did the good he did through his philanthropy and the good his business did for the American Consumer justify his somewhat unscrupulous business practices?</p>
<p>Just wondering everybody else’s feelings I just wrote an essay on it. I wanna see some other peoples thoughts and Ill post my essay.</p>
<p>I think Rockefeller is a captain of industry. Some of his practices were, of course, questionable, but nonetheless he helped formed the industrial base for America.</p>
<p>First, economics is not a zero-sum game (unlike college admissions). Right now, if Bill Gates makes a dollar, that does not mean I lose a dollar. Similarly Rockefeller can make a billion dollars. In return, the consumer gets kerosene lights, gasoline for cars, etc. If people think Rockefeller charged too much, they do not have to buy his oil. Rockefeller’s monopoly was good because it allowed the company to gain advantage in economies of scale, which states that a large company can cut costs more than numerous competing companies.</p>
<p>We should also realize laws aren’'t exactly just either. Rockefeller might have broken some laws, but those laws might have been written or influenced by his opponents designed to destroy his company.</p>
<p>Many laws were written to curb the excesses of JDR. For example, paying people in company script only redeemable at the company store is today, frowned upon. To make up for the days of excess, the Rockefeller family has given away billions, including giving national parks to the U.S., and of course, their greatest gift, The University of Chicago.</p>
<p>Rockefeller wasn’t the only one. I can think of quite a few Robber Baron types that were instrumental in founding or supporting American universities; Stanford, Vanderbilt, Hearst (UC Berkeley), Duke, Carnegie, Mellon. Today we have Bill Gates, the Yahoo and Google Guys, Hewlett, Packard, Olin. They may not start places, but they sure give a chunk of money. Maybe someone should start a thread on this.</p>
<p>They were men who propelled the US economy in an evil way. As Machiavelli would say- the end justifies the means.</p>
<p>The gilded age of the United States-like so many other eras of innovation and industry- led to the rise of many controversial individuals. From this gilded age arose
men both fabulously rich as well as ruthless. These men were in control of more money that the United States budget and wielded more power than the president. They were not only business men, but often philanthropists as well. However, we must ask, were these men Robber Barons who exploited the common man in search of their own wealth? Or, were they Captains of Industry, men who served the public of their time and in retrospect serve as models of the American ‘rags to riches’ dream?</p>
<p>Perhaps no man is a better example of this controversy than John D Rockefeller. Born somewhat forebodingly in Richford, NY to parents marginally well off, but certainly not rich. Similar to his birth, his rise to power was unremarkable. It was “accomplished over a quarter of a century by courageous venturing in a field so risky that most large capitalists avoided it”, as described by one biographer, Allan Nevis. By the 1870s, however, Rockefeller was the owner of the preeminent oil refinery in Cleveland, a major oil producing area. Rockefeller, not content to have Standard Oil be anything less than the standard for all of America, used (some say) unscrupulous shipping policies. His modus operandi was to have the railroad companies give him rebates for using their line and being a volume shipper (Document 5, The Value of Rebates). When his competitors found out about this they demanded the same preferential treatment from the railroads. Rockefeller fought back by having the railroads pay him rebates for shipping his competitors goods!</p>
<p>With the added momentum and revenues created by rebates there was no stopping the standard oil machine. In addition to rebates, Rockefeller was a proponent of horizontal integration. He sought to corner the market on oil by taking control of already existing oil companies. At this method he was incredibly successful and within six weeks in 1872, Standard Oil had absorbed 22 of its 26 Cleveland competitors. Often, all Rockefeller would have to do in order to force a company to merge was show them his profit margins and what they were up against and subsequently make a decent offer. If they refused he then threatened to do anything short of setting fire to their oil fields. He was known to drop his oil prices, drive a business into bankruptcy and buy them up again cheaply at auction. Rarely however, did it reach this extreme. Most businesses faced the inevitable and capitulated their companies to the Standard Oil Trust.</p>
<p>At its peak, the Standard Oil Trust controlled more than nine-tenths of the market for kerosene and petroleum products. Despite Standard Oil’s monopolistic practices, it benefited the American Consumer. Rockefeller’s trust not only improved the quality and availability of kerosene products, but actually drove prices lower. Kerosene prices fell a remarkable 99% during the life of the Standard Oil Trust! While Rockefeller obviously had the ability to dive oil prices through the roof he did not stating that “[He] had no ambition to make a fortune; mere moneymaking has never been [his] goal. [He] had an ambition to build.” Rockefeller’s business practices often benefited even the men he drove out of business! Whenever he bought out a company, Rockefeller gave the owner a fair deal offering them cash and even stock in his company. In addition, many of his former competitors became his compatriots. Two of his fiercest competitors, Rogers and Pratt became leading men in his Standard Oil Company. </p>
<p>Standard Oil’s business practices not only benefited the American consumer but John D. Rockefeller’s philanthropic policies were also blessing for the American on many other levels. An ardent Philanthropist from the beginning (Rockefeller gave 10% of every paycheck, even his first, as a church tithe) Rockefeller donated the greater proportion of his amassed wealth to various charities. A firm believer in the Efficiency Movement, Rockefeller donated hundreds of millions to primary and secondary institution of learning. He is associated with many universities through his donations including Spelman College, Denison University, Rockefeller University, Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health, Peking Union Medical College, and University of Chicago, which John D. Rockefeller called (quite rightly) “the best investment [he] ever made.” As well as donating money for education, Rockefeller bestowed large amounts of money to health care reform and his Rockefeller Foundation is largely responsible for the eradication of the hookworm epidemic in the American South. Rockefeller also created the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial Foundation to help with WWI relief and to work in the social sciences. Rockefellers philanthropy totaled an astounding 550 million in a time when a loaf of bread was, at most, a nickel. </p>
<p>To call John D. Rockefeller a Robber Baron would be a fallacy. To call him ‘Reck-a-Feller’ as some of his opponents called him would be more correct. However, as ruthless as his practices of putting his competitors out of business were, they were beneficial to the American consumer and economy. Aside from his business strategies, we must take into account the man. The man who was the first billionaire and gave over half of it away. The man who created universities and cured diseases. The man who in later life was known to give a dime to every child he met. Perhaps Ron Chernow summed it up best stating “What makes [Rockefeller] problematic—and why he continues to inspire ambivalent reactions—-is that his good side was every bit as good as his bad side was bad. Seldom has history produced such a contradictory figure.” While his business practices were indeed contradictory, it would be unfair to label John D. Rockefeller, the man, as a Robber Baron. He was indeed a Captain of Industry and more importantly the quintessential example of the American philanthropist.</p>
<p>Did you just copy and paste your APUSH essay in here?</p>
<p>APUSH I wish… It’s the honors US Hist class and we take the lame-o CLEP exam.</p>
<p>whatever works for ya.
Does chicago take clep?</p>
<p>No clue. (10char)</p>
<p>what’s clep?</p>
<p>oh, nvm</p>
<p>rockefeller was a pretty cool guy</p>
<p>Chicago does not take CLEP</p>
<p>Rockefeller was among the best of the industrialists IMHO. He made so much money SPECIFICALLY for the purpose of spending it on philanthropic enterprises. His businesses alone were responsible for an 80% decrease in the cost of kerosene to the average consumer over the lifetime of his company. He not only founded UChicago, but also gave money to other colleges, including the seed money for Spelman College in Atlanta. He gave coins to everyone he met. His special interest (and hence extreme amount of funding) in the areas of health and medicine can directly connect him to the eradication of hookworm and yellow fever. Whatever his supposedly “unfair” business practices, when viewed as a whole with his philanthropy and the savings he gave to the consumer, John D. Rockefeller was a huge positive for nearly every single American.</p>