Edexcel A2 History 6HI03/C2 - USA - June 8th 2015 Thread!

In a Part b are you still able to use Keynesians interpretations and monetarists and stuff like 'source 7 agrees with the monetarists interpretation of the causes of the boom'

YUPP! its stuff like that that will get you own knowledge marks :smile:

Reply 181

DarcieT

Original post by ycullebanna

I don't think McCarthy could come in a part B question!

do you have any ideas about what might come up?

Reply 182

Drunken Bard

8

Original post by JoshH3

Anyone know reasons why slump turned into a depression? Got banking system, gold standard and the rising unemployment, what were the details of the bad banking system and what is the gold standard reason and any detail please?? Thanks

Posted from TSR Mobile

Main reason is due to "Margin buying" so banks allowing people to take out loans solely to speculate the stock market. Another reason is the fact that banks were small independent ventures, meaning their cash reserves were relatively small. When the stock market crashed, much of the borrowed money the bank had loaned effectively vanished. Panic ensued, many ran to the banks to withdraw their money, only to find out their money was gone, making banks take out loans from other banks in order to repay the money owed to their customers. It was this constant borrowing between banks that lead to the Banking crisis as nobody had enough money to repay loans, so the banks collapsed as a result.

The amount of money lost on stocks resulted in a deflated economy, meaning the economy was losing money, causing business to stop investing and start saving instead, leading to many workers particularly in the middle class being laid off around 10 million workers. This caused more problems though as there was less people to spend money on products, meaning business made less, meaning more people had to be let go.

As for the gold standard, the gold standard acts a baseline for the value of a currency against the weight of gold. Many sought to abandon the gold standard to effectively reset the economy. Issue was, the US refused to abandon it, and when Britain eventually did in 1931, international trade effectively froze as currency was not able to be converted. Other things such as the Hawley-Smoot tariff effectively ceased international trade, freezing the market further.

Reply 183

ycullebanna

1

Original post by DarcieT

do you have any ideas about what might come up?

Not really no :frown:

Don't want to guess and end up being completely wrong! In reality, we have NO idea what they're going to throw at us tomorrow :frown:

Reply 184

DarcieT

Original post by sarahalouane

YUPP! its stuff like that that will get you own knowledge marks :smile:

Thankyou!! Good luck.

Reply 185

sarahalouane

6

Original post by DarcieT

Thankyou!! Good luck.

thanks

you too!

Reply 186

DarcieT

Original post by ycullebanna

Not really no :frown:

Don't want to guess and end up being completely wrong! In reality, we have NO idea what they're going to throw at us tomorrow :frown:

It sucks! but speaking to some GCSE students Edexcel seemed to be REALLY nice with their question this year so lets hope that's the case for us!

Reply 187

stressedbrownboy

3

Guys someone give me points on what to use if the following essay came up for the 40 marker ;
To what extent did Hoover elongate the Depression /Hoover's actions caused the Depression to worsen, how far do you agree?

We are ONE FAMILY ALL STRIVING TO SMASH THIS EXAM TOMORO, come on ppl lets do this together !

Reply 188

ycullebanna

1

Original post by DarcieT

It sucks! but speaking to some GCSE students Edexcel seemed to be REALLY nice with their question this year so lets hope that's the case for us!

Oooooo that's nice to hear!!!! Although, speaking to AS students, they weren't so nice with their questions!

Reply 189

DarcieT

Any final predictions about Part A and B questions for the New Deal controversy? :s-smilie:

Reply 190

elliemarling

7

Original post by ycullebanna

I'm leaning towards Immigration, but I'm not too sure. If not, a general question on the social/political tensions in the 1920s.

What would you write about for women?! And what are the policies for the 1920s? D:

Women would probably be judging how successful the movement was throughout the 1920s so you want to be judging the positives and negatives :

- Legislation - Obviously the 19th Amendment and the Shepperd-Towner Act 1921. Then basically talk about the lack of government aid to women, especially in regard to abortions/birth control. Equal Rights Amendment was not passed until 1972.

- Social impact - More jobs opportunities, beauty salons, cosmetic industry boomed and more women were getting involved in politics HOWEVER most work was demeaning and underpaid, lack of minimum wage/restricted labour hours, lack of university placements (40% general and 5% medical) and only women in political power or high paying jobs like doctors, lawyers, etc.

- Splinters in the movement - Even before the war the movement was divided, however, the nationalism that came with WWI helped draw the movement together. However, after the passing of 19th Amendment, women failed to agree on a common motive. Older feminists criticised the flappers for their materialistic nature as they believed that their concern for appearance only solidified the importance to please men, yet the flappers disagreed and labelled themselves a "new breed of feminists"

OVERALL - movement was more of a success for individual women such as Nellie Tayloe Ross who was the first woman elected governor of state in 1924. Failure to unite the movement meant that little could be done to further the cause as any protest wasn't united and failed to reach national attention. Job opportunities increased and women working raised 25% after the war but in bad jobs and women were still expected to quit work after marriage.

Policies of 1920s:

Tariffs: Emergency Tariff and Fordney-McCumber = good short term but caused very bad long term as caused retaliation from other countries. Chemical industry was well impacted buy agricultural tariffs abroad meant the suffering farmers struggled to sell technology/produce. Negative.

Taxation: Decreased max tax rates from 65% to 25%. Again, good short term, bad long term. Beneficial to the rich and protected business interests, however, only served to worsen the unequal distribution of wealth and caused more poverty.

Agriculture: Emergency Tariff/Fordney-McCumber Ive mentioned. Capper-Volstead Act/Grain Futures Trading Act failed to benefit agriculture as in 1929, farmers only gained $273 per year. Failed to pass the McNary-Haugen Bill as it involved to much government intervention (use as a critique of laissez-faire)

Unions: Prevention of unions/yellow-dog contracts. Morally shady, however, meant businesses could profit and whilst it was generally good as low wages/high profit meant more for businesses, it also decreased disposable income. Overall beneficial, however, it was also worsened unequal distribution of wealth

OVERALL: REPUBLICAN POLICES WERE REALLY REALLY BAD.

Reply 191

sarahalouane

6

Original post by stressedbrownboy

Guys someone give me points on what to use if the following essay came up for the 40 marker ;
To what extent did Hoover elongate the Depression /Hoover's actions caused the Depression to worsen, how far do you agree?

We are ONE FAMILY ALL STRIVING TO SMASH THIS EXAM TOMORO, come on ppl lets do this together !

the stuff top rigĥt can be used to argue that and then talk about all the other reasons it got worse/lasted so long(the stuff underneath) hope this helps :smile:

Reply 192

ycullebanna

1

Original post by elliemarling

Women would probably be judging how successful the movement was throughout the 1920s so you want to be judging the positives and negatives :

- Legislation - Obviously the 19th Amendment and the Shepperd-Towner Act 1921. Then basically talk about the lack of government aid to women, especially in regard to abortions/birth control. Equal Rights Amendment was not passed until 1972.

- Social impact - More jobs opportunities, beauty salons, cosmetic industry boomed and more women were getting involved in politics HOWEVER most work was demeaning and underpaid, lack of minimum wage/restricted labour hours, lack of university placements (40% general and 5% medical) and only women in political power or high paying jobs like doctors, lawyers, etc.

- Splinters in the movement - Even before the war the movement was divided, however, the nationalism that came with WWI helped draw the movement together. However, after the passing of 19th Amendment, women failed to agree on a common motive. Older feminists criticised the flappers for their materialistic nature as they believed that their concern for appearance only solidified the importance to please men, yet the flappers disagreed and labelled themselves a "new breed of feminists"

OVERALL - movement was more of a success for individual women such as Nellie Tayloe Ross who was the first woman elected governor of state in 1924. Failure to unite the movement meant that little could be done to further the cause as any protest wasn't united and failed to reach national attention. Job opportunities increased and women working raised 25% after the war but in bad jobs and women were still expected to quit work after marriage.

Policies of 1920s:

Tariffs: Emergency Tariff and Fordney-McCumber = good short term but caused very bad long term as caused retaliation from other countries. Chemical industry was well impacted buy agricultural tariffs abroad meant the suffering farmers struggled to sell technology/produce. Negative.

Taxation: Decreased max tax rates from 65% to 25%. Again, good short term, bad long term. Beneficial to the rich and protected business interests, however, only served to worsen the unequal distribution of wealth and caused more poverty.

Agriculture: Emergency Tariff/Fordney-McCumber Ive mentioned. Capper-Volstead Act/Grain Futures Trading Act failed to benefit agriculture as in 1929, farmers only gained $273 per year. Failed to pass the McNary-Haugen Bill as it involved to much government intervention (use as a critique of laissez-faire)

Unions: Prevention of unions/yellow-dog contracts. Morally shady, however, meant businesses could profit and whilst it was generally good as low wages/high profit meant more for businesses, it also decreased disposable income. Overall beneficial, however, it was also worsened unequal distribution of wealth

OVERALL: REPUBLICAN POLICES WERE REALLY REALLY BAD.

Thank you SO much, you are a life saver!

Reply 193

stressedbrownboy

3

Original post by sarahalouane

the stuff top rigĥt can be used to argue that and then talk about all the other reasons it got worse/lasted so long(the stuff underneath) hope this helps :smile:

Thank you SOOOOOO MUCH, i really hope you get an A* in the exam tomorrow as people like you deserve it

Reply 194

Drunken Bard

8

Original post by stressedbrownboy

Guys someone give me points on what to use if the following essay came up for the 40 marker ;
To what extent did Hoover elongate the Depression /Hoover's actions caused the Depression to worsen, how far do you agree?

We are ONE FAMILY ALL STRIVING TO SMASH THIS EXAM TOMORO, come on ppl lets do this together !

Fairly simple to answer my friend. Simply, Hoover didn't do alot, so the majority of the argument will be his lack of action caused the Depression to worsen

1) Look at what actions Hoover took (Very few to be honest, he did invest in some public work schemes such as the hoover dam, hoover was very anti-interventionist in the economy)

2) Make the argument that the complete crash in the market meant any sort of government intervention would have to be wide spread, and even then it might not have been enough (Agriculture still in a mess, deflated economy, banks closing nationwide every day, business afraid to invest causing them to lay off workers)

3) Argue that Hoover should have done more, if Hoover had taken some of the actions FDR did during the new deal ie: Stopping the banks from borrowing money, attempt to raise Agricultural prices, invested more in public works)

4) Lack of any sort of social security meant that those who were out of work, had no money to live off whatsoever, leading to the spring up of soup kitchens, and of course "Hoovervilles". A viscous cycle of Business failing to invest, workers being laid off, workers not having money to spend, business then looses money continues and therefore doesn't invest continues leading to 20% of the workforce being unemployed

5) Conclude that Hoover really didn't do enough, hoping instead that time would heal the broken markets. Instead the situation just continued to worsen with more people becoming unemployed, less money in peoples pockets and the economy deflating even further. His action that he did take were too little to late and really not large enough to effect the nation as a whole.