John D. ROCKEFELLER was a great man
Posted July 22nd, 2008 by preferred
output
Someone here posted the John D. Rockefeller was a "con" and a "robber baron." Since this goes to heart of the capitalist system Ron Paul defends, I thought it was appropriate to discuss this.
That Rockefeller was a criminal is false. Nothing could be further from the truth. That's anti-capitalist propaganda. Rockefeller was a market entrepreneur (as opposed to a political entrepreneur) who drove refined oil prices down with relentless competitiveness and ingenuity, and should be commended for it. He didn't use government to crush competitors (unlike his enemies who used antitrust legislation against him), but acted with free-market enterpreneurial dynamics to become the leading refiner. And on top of that he contributed $550,000,000 to charity, including many universities.
Read the real story: John D. Rockefeller and the Oil Industry, by Burton Folsom: http://www.fee.org/Public... (Warning: This may be discomforting to newly socialists-turned-wannabe libertarian conservatives here).
It's pretty pathetic that he's being criticized as a criminal when he he's done a lot more for America than anyone on this forum.
I recommend all leftists, those deceived by leftists, and those indoctrinated by the public education system, and everyone else read "The Myth of the Robber Barons" by Burton Folsom, Jr. http://www.amazon.com/Myt... It's a must for any freedom-lover's library. (Notice on the Amazon site that it says those who bought this book also bought Dr. Paul's The Revolution: The Manifesto. That's a good sign. We're getting through to the anti-capitalists and converting them).
LISTEN to this EXCELLENT radio interview by Jason Lewis of KTLK with the author of the ariticle and book, which includes much discussion of John D. Rockefeller: http://a1135.g.akamai.net...
Note>: This about John D. Rockefeller, the Standard Oil entrepreneuer (who retired in 1897). Don't confuse him with John D. Rockefeller, Jr., his son who became a Standard Oil director after his father retired.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Listening to this radio guy
I say that the break up of MA-Bell helped fuel access to Internet, AOL etc. Old AT&T had no incentive to provide additional services prior to that.
I think that the government role should be to enable FREE Markets. Corporations that enter POLITICS such as the Rockefellers gain unfair business advantages.
A few comments down
A few comments down preferred said this:
"Endgame. Isn't that an Alex Jones film? That guy is a moron. You coulnd't pay me to watch his movie or listen to his show. I've heard all I want to hear from him."
He claims to admire brave entrepreneurs, and claims to support RP... but cannot stand Alex Jonez, the ONLY person in the media to who supported RP, let alone the ONLY one in the media brave enough to expose the evil globalists like the Rockafellas.
Preferred "admires" JDR for his business savy but knows nothing and more importantly cares little of his "illuminated" sons?
This thread needs deletion.
Semper Fortis
If I'm not mistaken, JDR created the Federal Reserve System
http://www.reformation.or...
Here is a chart showing how GREAT John D. Rockefeller was to the American People. He and Nelson Aldrich joined forces to push through the central bank and Income Tax to pay for it in 1913.
He was certainly a guiding
He was certainly a guiding force. Yes, Rockefeller's lasting legacy is the Income Tax, the Federal Reserve, and American entry into WWI. Quite a resume for a believer in "free enterprise." And don't forget buying oil rights from the government that stole them in the U.S.S.R.
Rockefeller is to capitalism what McCain is to a humble foreign policy.
______________________________________________________
Don't waste time with Obama, McCain, Nader or Barr - join the Campaign For Liberty! http://www.campaignforlib... The Constitution is more important than voting for the evil of 4 lessers.
John D. wasn't the problem, it was his heirs.
The rockefeller family got into politics, and they've been fighting against us ever since.
-jcr
quote: In 1870, the Standard
quote: In 1870, the Standard Oil Company was incorporated in Ohio by John D. Rockefeller. It was illegal under Ohio law (and almost every other State) to control a company in another state. Rockefeller managed to secretly buy up and control the independent oil producers and refiners.
In 1883, he moved the seat of empire to the Empire state and set up headquarters in the Metropolis of Mammon at 26 Broadway in New York City. There he set up a TRUST or HOLDING company and began to ruthlessly devour all the independent oil producers and refiners both nationally and internationally
http://www.reformation.or...
"ruthlessly devour"
Anti-capitalist rhetoric. He BOUGHT these companies. No one was forced to sell. They sold because they liked what he offered to pay, and benefited from that.
Good for
him. Free-market capitalism.
That's how he was able to drive prices down, by creating economies of scale. Consumers benefitted from this.
But what he did was
But what he did was illegal
he broke the law
The law was illegal
Where in the Constitution is that authorized?
i never said anything about
i never said anything about the Constitution.
Its a state law
It was illegal under Ohio law (and almost every other State) to control a company in another state.
Laws like that are created
Laws like that are created so free market can exist.
without it, one company like standard oil will buy everyone up and control all the oil prices in the USA or the world.
just like walmart.
walmarts capitalism is turning into a corp socialism
That would be a restriction on interstate trade
That's anti-free-market.
Read this article about the destructiveness of interstate trade barriers: http://www.cato.org/pubs/...
"Barriers to trade with other states are ostensibly prohibited by the
Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. This clause essentially
mandates that no state shall take any action that inhibits trade with
any other state."
who said i was not against a
who said i was not against a restriction that would let free markets flourish?
MY YOUTUBE http://www.youtube.com/us...
MY WEB SITE http://www.InfoSpill.com
if that was the case then
if that was the case then you might as well get rid of all the laws including murder laws so he could kill all the competition.
some laws are needed for a free market to exist
Yes some
laws are needed for a free market to exist. Those laws should be laws against government from interfering with trade. All government should do is protect private property and freedom of contract.
I can see where your going
I can see where your going but what does that have to do with Rockefeller breaking the state laws when they where imposed?
if he did not do so many law breaking things like that behind closed doors then there is a chance he would not have got such a monopoly under his belt.
He never had a monopoly.
At the height of his market share, he had 88% market share. That's not a monopoly. From that point, the market share kept dropping due to competition. By the time the antitrust trial started in 1911, market share was only 64% and there were over 100 other refiners competing.
The moral is you can't obtain a monopoly without government intervention to create a monopoly. Competition comes in inevitably.
Standard was broken up for "restricting trade," which is vague and nonsensical, and which is why the Sherman antitrust law should be abolished. (That's Dr. Paul's position as well). Standard acted as a business acts in a free market. It didn't use coercion to obtain success. It obtained success through relentless increases in efficiency.
(What's your source that he broke a state law, btw? Just that web page? It's not cited. And there is nothing wrong with breaking an unjust or unconstitutional law anyway. What if the state forbid starting a business? Why should that be obeyed? )
Hey what about his son
Rockefeller Jr. You know so much about Rockefeller Sr, that I am finding it curious that you have no real opinion on Jr.
I told you
I don't know anything about him. I like to read about entreprenuers, not inheritors of wealth who did nothing to earn it.
ROCKEFELLER
Take him & his heirs & shove em up your ignorant ass. Enuf said.
John D.
changed when the government broke up standard oil, ripping his company apart. His rage brought him to the European bankers, who had a grand idea that world government would have never let that happen.
He devoted his fortune to planting the seeds of socialism in the US, after he shielded his fortune from the Income tax with "foundations".
Now there's something I didn't know
Thanks NJforRP.
An industrialist, he was ...
and I admire him for that.
In addition, there is much to not admire.
WAHOR!!
Preferred what is your take on Rockefeller Jr?
Do you think that Rockefeller Jr. is worth his salt? From what I can tell he wants the NWO pretty bad. Your thoughts?
I haven't followed the rest
of the Rockefeller family enough to comment. I'm sure there's a few rotten apples in there.
Very nice, preferred.
Not even a hint of condescension or arrogance. Welcome to dailypaul. Off topic, but what about property rights and the environment? Is that something you have followed?
Of course
I'm all for private property.
Good.
I'm looking forward, (I think), to your thoughts on any future threads on environmental issues.
Do tell.
I suggest you watch ENDGAME then. Oh and in case you're wondering ROCKEFELLER JR is the most rotten apple of them all loaded with DDT and crawling with worms. Someone as knowing about the history of his family would surly know that Rockefeller Jr is a total piece of human filth. Humm.
http://video.google.com/v...
I don't know about the history of his family
I've read about him, and that's all.
Endgame. Isn't that an Alex Jones film? That guy is a moron. You coulnd't pay me to watch his movie or listen to his show. I've heard all I want to hear from him.
Perfect chance to read up partner
I would like your thoughts as well on this. No big hurry tho. You helped me learn something now I would like to see your thoughts on Rockefeller Jr when you have an opinion on them. Since he is still alive today and we are in the present.
The anti-capitalist sentiment on this website
is really coming out, due to my posting this.
It's pretty sad, when the Ron Paul Revolution was supposed to be defending free-market capitalism and opposing government regulation. Instead what this post is attracting is a bunch of leftist hate-the-rich-and-successful anti-capitalist types.
Am I on the Daily Paul or Daily Kucinich?
The only anticapitalist
The only anticapitalist sentiment on this website I see is from you. I frankly think you know as much about free enterprise as you do about, well, Rockefeller.
First of all, at one point (around 1890) Standard was refining 90% of the country's oil -- by whose objective standard is this not a monopoly? And no, yours doesn't count.
Second of all, what on God's green earth gives you the idea that Rockefeller was a supporter of capitalism? He was a supporter of his own "free enterprise," but certainly not anyone else's. He was a key member of the National Security League (the organization pushing for armament and entry into WWI for the benefit of special financial interests), for instance, and his role in the creation of the Federal Reserve is well known.
I would be more impressed with this sudden love of yours for free enterprise if it seemed you knew anything about it.
______________________________________________________
Don't waste time with Obama, McCain, Nader or Barr - join the Campaign For Liberty! http://www.campaignforlib... The Constitution is more important than voting for the evil of 4 lessers.
So then chap.
What have you done for the Campaign for Liberty. Have you walked and passed out slim jims door to door. Have you donated your hard earned money and time. Or have you come here for one day and try to make us all seem like socialist? Hate to tell you pal I believe in Constitutional Freedoms. You will not divide us with your attempts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w...
Needed to be done.
I just saw this.
http://www.dailypaul.com/...
I'm not tried to divide anything
I'm trying to educate.
I was amazed that I saw so much anti-capitalist sentiment on this website, when it's supposed to be a Ron Paul website, and have to to say something about it.
Excuse me.
I thought it was an innuendo to boost Rockefeller Jr's PR. I agree with you, thanks for the history lesson, I wasn't aware. Glad you're here. What's your take on Austrian Economics?
Don't be so suspicious
I like Austrian Economics. Marginalism makes perfect sense as far as I can tell.
Only suspicious
where it is due. I'll see what you think about Rockefeller Jr to make a decision.
Murderer
Nevermind the Ludlow massacre.
http://www.hartford-hwp.c...
Which he had nothing
to do with.
He was almost 80 years old at that time, and had retired in 1897.
here is his wiki bio
http://en.wikipedia.org/w...
Yeah sounds great until you see that he monopolized the Oil Industry. Leading to such great things as Prohibition which came when people realized they could run their cars on alcohol. Also helped pave the way for destruction of the urban rail car infrastructure that had been in place and supplied a great way for travel in cities so big oil could sell more gasoline to car buyers.
From what I can remember the Apple doesn't fall to far from the tree. Rockefeller's dad or not the same blood line shows through.
Besides that what type of asshole would come to the Daily Paul be here a day and post this crap. You are not a supporter of Ron Paul. And supporters of a Free-Capitalist society don't include monopolies as a good thing to be associated with.
Good job at failing to compare Dr. Paul to the Rockefellers. I know that is what your stupid disinfo goal was.
Standard was not a monopoly.
It had 64% market share, and over 100 other competitors, when the antitrust trial started.
And it's relevant here, because Dr. Paul, like all free-marketers, is opposed to antitrust laws. Antitrust is government attacking the free-market. It's "big government."
Apparently you have no background in free-market economics. The position is that monopolies are the result of government intervention. They don't happen without government creating them.
I posted this because clueless people such as yourself here are attacking some very basic principles aligned with Dr. Paul and free-market capitalism.
What about the argument
that whenever you give the govt power to regulate you are also giving human beings the power to selectively enforce these regulations thereby gumming up the free market and creating de facto monopolies for a "fee." For instance I prefer stevia as a sweetener because it doesn't affect my BCL, but because of regulations in the sugar market -- which also artificially keep high fructose corn syrup the more attractive option over pure cane sugar -- Iit is illegal for any product sold in the US to say that it is sweetened w/ stevia -- a plant which has been time-tested for hundreds of years.
I'm not an expert by any means, just more or less trying to move the discussion along. It seems that every time a regulatory body is created it is only more power taken from the consumer and placed in the hands of a few who will then attract lobbyists.
--------------------------
"I killed the banks"
Exactly.
Regulation becomes a tool for business interests to use coercion against their competitors.
You are a bully.
"Clueless people such as yourself"?????? Not only are you a bully, you are more than rude. I have never felt the need in 46 weeks to call anyone on dailypaul a bully....not even BillyDee. And I would have never in a million years have gotten on dailypaul and on on my very first day called another poster "clueless." This is too much. Enough is enough.
How am I a bully?
The guy calls me an "asshole" unprovoked, and I'm the bully?
Sorry
I should have never resorted to name calling. However, I still maintain, your first day here and you have continually shown an amazing amount of arrogance with your comments. (I hope that's better.)
When someone insults Ron Paul, I will not let that stand. It seems that this quirk of mine has translated itself to fellow DPers. Anyway, carry on.
Get your history straight
They maintained 64% after they were broken up. Before that point Rockefellers Standard Oil had a vice grip on the market.
Monopolies happen when government officials get kick backs from the companies like they are doing now with everything dealing with the Military Industrial Complex. (HALIBURTON, CARLYLE GROUP are a few that come to mind) Governments don't create monopolies. Companies that pay lobbyist to fill the pockets of politicians do. Same thing with the Federal Reserve. International Bankers put people in place that would bend the constitution. Do you hear Ron Paul saying the Fed is a good thing....HELL NO. He want's to get rid of it.
ONCE AGAIN POOR EFFORT TO DISTORT THE TRUTH.