Public Property versus Keeping Public Peace Question

Description

You should discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the author’s arguments and evidence. Now, I summarized many points from the book, but I don’t think you need to make arguments for each of them, so you’d better pick some important points to argue. The professor very cares about my critical analysis. I strongly encourage you to take some time to look at the last file”general advice” I send to you. You’ll have a better idea of how to modify and add more arguments to what I’ve already done. 

3 attachmentsSlide 1 of 3attachment_1attachment_1attachment_2attachment_2attachment_3attachment_3.slider-slide > img { width: 100%; display: block; }
.slider-slide > img:focus { margin: auto; }

Unformatted Attachment Preview

General Advice on Writing Critical Essays:A critical essay should discuss the strengths and
weaknesses of the author’s arguments and evidence. Are the author’s explanations convincing, are
they complete, how are you convinced, what evidence and economic reasoning is presented, is the
evidence and economic reasoning strong or weak? How is it strong or weak? And so on. Don’t just
state an opinion. Dissect the author’s presentation. Articulate your judgments, and support them
with your own reasoning, economic ideas, and use of the author’s evidence. Explain why or how
you arrived at your conclusions. Develop and elaborate your view in detail. You are not expected to
be an expert in any field, but you are expected to be able to reason. Finally, you can also use your
economic understanding (verbal and/or graphical/mathematical) to add to and develop the author’s
argument as a form of critical analysis.
For those having difficulty writing critical essays there are a few tricks that might help. It is better
to discuss a few related points in detail than to list many undeveloped ideas. Narrow your discussion.
Pick only the most important points and throw out minor ideas. If you are not going to discuss it in
detail, don’t bring it up. If you can write a five-page essay based on one paragraph or on one page
in the assigned readings that is ok. Make your essay a coherent whole, rather than a piece of shotgun
writing. Trace through, step by step, the logic of the author’s argument. Are steps left out or is some
kind of behavior not explained that is critical to the author’s story? Explain how and why. Are there
other reasonable economic explanations that the author did not rule out? Explain how these
competing explanations work. What kinds of evidence are used to support the argument? Does the
evidence really support the author’s argument, or might the evidence fit some other (economic)
explanation? Describe how it might fit some other explanation. What missing evidence would the
author need to make the argument stronger? And so on…. Think of yourself as an economic lawyer.
Either you must defend the author and keep your client from the gallows, or you are the prosecuting
lawyer, and you are going to expose the author’s careless economic crimes, explode the author’s
alibi, and separate the trustworthy evidence from untrustworthy evidence. Most people find it easier
to be the prosecutor. Be creative in your application of economic thinking to the author’s argument,
but don’t violate economic reasoning in your thinking. For example, arguments that assert a change
in ‘tastes’ or ‘non-maximizing’ behavior are violations of economic methodology—don’t use them.
And remember, this is not a book report. Don’t just summarize the reading. Finally, just because the
author is your professor does not mean you should not be critical. Arguments and evidence exist
separate from the individual. A kiss-ass essay will get you a zero.
German Immigrant Servitude
German immigrants were in the group of the first Europeans to visit North America. Organized
markets for European settler servants in North America started as early as around 1620 in
Jamestown and ended in Baltimore, Philadelphia, and New Orleans about 1820. For nearly two
centuries, these markets flourished and endured despite many political revolutions, wartime
interruptions, depressions in the transatlantic shipping market, and competition from native-born
free labor as well as slave. Researchers have suggested several reasons for the collapse. This paper
aims to critically analyze Farley Grubb’s article “German Immigration and Servitude in America,
1709-1920.
Farley Grubb is more concerned with revealing the truth than with exploring and endorsing a
popular historical theme or economic model. He was very honest about his research work and how
he got his data. Population growth and economic development of the state and colony of
Pennsylvania were shaped a lot by the immigrants of Germany. One of the hypotheses is
imprisonment elimination for liability made contract implementation hard. Five hypotheses are
proposed to explain the decline in demand for servants as to the organized disappearance of the
European immigrant market. Also, servants running away too much is another hypothesis (Grubb
317). Moreover, there was the decline of 1819 that made workers reluctant to purchase servants.
The other hypothesis is that interference from immigrant aid communities made law enforcement
complicated, and workers found salary labor superior.
The author divides all assumptions about the disappearance of immigrants into two main
explanations: supply-driven and demand-driven. Also, the author gets rid of all demand-driven
reasons and suggests that the prices behavior of labor is not consistent with explanations that are
demand-driven. If the immigrants’ supply went down to zero, then the cost would have fallen,
though this is not it. At this period, servant costs went up the quantities went down, getting rid of
any form of demand-driven elaboration or explanation (Grubb 323). While the argument of Grubb
regarding the elimination of demand-driven explanations is supported well, his argument on
supporting supply-driven explanations requires more substantial evidence, especially on kinship
relations and the essence of the payment system.
Grubb makes a good point about supporting supply-driven explanations regarding why
servitude was crushed at the beginning of the 1800s. There is not enough proof given on the
increase of kinship relations in his discussion. As time moved and the labor system progressed,
many immigrants were getting settled in America hence creating recognized systems of support
that novel immigrants could depend on. Contracting and monitoring a worker was costly and
evidence says that monitoring within a kinship network showed to be a cost-efficient market
operation leading to a market shift (Grubb 369). History backs this phenomenon up through Grubb
suggest that although the German American community-directed and elevating resources amount
as well as interest towards their relatives following 1815, the charity magnitude and credit that they
protracted is hard to measure.
With the information given that the author provides, immigrants’ number who used this
payment way to relieve their debt can be estimated roughly. This does not give enough argument
on why supply-driven reasons should be acknowledged. To strengthen this argument, there would
be a requirement of personal immigrants’ accounts and networks of kinship as well as linkage
evidence or lineage among immigrants, Germans, and Americans at this period. Looking at family
relations between Germany and America would result in stronger proof supporting this
supplydriven clarification (Grubb 320). When specific evidence is taken from both America and
Germany, it will strengthen the kinship argument, and the remittance system would also be
strengthened.
The collapse of the servitude was very abrupt (Grubb 365). This shows that the rise in wealth
of immigrants, friends, and family in America may not be the immediate cause of the servitude
end. Wealth could not have gone high fast enough in such a short interval to have gotten rid of the
servitude, and it is supposed to have given a slow long-run end in the percentage of servants instead
of the sudden virtual end. The answer to this puzzle, according to Grubb, lies in an exceptional
historical events sequence that altered a gradual deterioration into abrupt decline.
Payments or funds sent by mail are said to be the leading cause of the collapse of the servitude
immigrant service of Germany in America. The remittance system made labor and monetary costs
of passage less costly as there were no insurance experiences in the occasion of morality, morbidity,
or redemptioners escape. This argument is compelling, but the actual evidence of the scholar uses
an emphasis on immigrants or Irish and not German due to the absence of documentation.
Analysis of the documentation and proof of the essence of the Irish remittance system
illustrates the dominance of the payment scheme in link with immigration. Still, the author does
not wholly support the argument regarding the German immigrant servitude market. The author’s
information requires to be specific to the labor market of the German settler slavery market so that
the argument of supply-driven explanations gets substantial. A resolution to this absence of data
can be looking at how the remittances invasion affected Germany’s economy instead of just
focusing on the American systems.
An exact connection could also result in stronger remittance payments that could be traced
back to the economy of Germany. An increase in the system of remittance needed complementary
markets development. Paying for a transatlantic passage of a relative would be affordable under
the system of remittance compared to that of redemption only if there was a reliable and
inexpensive method to send money or boat tickets to Europe from America (Grubb 330). Before
developing the shipping lines of transatlantic and frequently scheduled service of passengers,
Americans would have found the expensive of contracting for a passenger of westbound berth for
a relative European prohibitive.
If the payment system was essential, that was a major cause in the German immigrant
servant market crash in America. There must be existing proof illustrating the remittance rise
payments sent to Germany prior to the fall of the market 1820s (Grubb 364). However, this market
was in America. It must influence the economy of Germany, and through including the alterations
that happened in both markets, Grubb would have a strong case.
The increase in reliance on racial slavery in the 18th century resulted in the minimization
of temporary servitude. Slavery was the essential system of labor in the 18th-century world, which
shaped the legal codes and the social structure that was established all over the colonies. Reducing
the number of workers and this period did not make them unimportant or servitude.
The author gives strong evidence for denying explanations that are demand-driven for the
decline of the labor market of Germany and raises convincing points that support supply-driven
descriptions. However, he does not focus on the consequences of the American side of the market
as contrasting to giving evidence from Germany and America. By illustrating linkage and lineage
among immigrants and families in America and Germany, the argument of Grubb regarding rising
kinship relationships resulting from the decline of the market would be much better.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment

Explanation & Answer:
3 pages

Tags:
public property

Keeping Public Peace

Supervision of slaves

Jenny Bourne Wahl

Divided audience

User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool’s honor code & terms of service.