Talk:Robber baron (industrialist)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Business and economics Portal
This article is within the scope of the Business and Economics WikiProject.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.
Robber baron (industrialist) was a good article, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Delisted version: No date specified. To provide a date use: {{DelistedGA|insert date in any format here}}

The use of the word "allegedly" is necessary to make it clear that some businessmen called "robber barons" did not, on examination, use tactics different from those who did not receive the label.

  • I accept that "allegedly" could have been applied to others (on the specifics of your argument, so you're only a criminal if convicted?). However, the term does not work as a qualifier, because using it means that any application of the term was either unfounded or frivolous. IMHO using this term would be POV. My revision takes a "it was perceived" line. 203.198.237.30 08:30, 27 October 2005 (UTC)


Contents

[edit] Business magnate, Entrepreneur, Industrialist...and others

There is substantial overlap between Business magnate, Entrepreneur, Industrialist and Robber baron (industrialist). Any thoughts on a possible merger, if not of articles, then at least of the redundant concepts and content which appears across these articles? Should one of these be the "main" article on the subject matter? I personally think "yes", but there does not seem to be a strong contender. There is businessperson (currently a mere substub), but the term lacks the connotations invoked by industrialist/magnate/mogul/tycoon etc. 203.198.237.30 03:43, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Merger of Industralist into Business Magnate now proposed. 203.198.237.30 03:51, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Shouldn't there be a source for the "minor fractions" of their wealth comment? I'd imagine some gave more than others. I also question the inclusion of the "common good". Perhaps adding a "perceived" to the sentence? --24.154.234.132 01:53, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Delisted Good Article

There are no references, and the article is not particularly comprehensive. Pointlessness 20:11, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Instances of bad behavior

This article desperately needs concrete examples of the kind of brutish and/or illegal behavior which warranted this kind of label.

[edit] 1830s study

Does anybody have anymore information about the study of 303 executives? I can't find any source cited in Howard Zinn's book. 66.193.220.126 17:10, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that statistic is at least out of place. If anybody wants to analyze "the american dream," a link to that article would be sufficient. I am removing it. If someone wants to restore it, find it's actual source, and add a counter example to balance it. Confounded bridge 16:55, 17 March 2007 (UTC)confoundedbridge


[edit] Why isn't J.P. Morgan in the list? And Mellon?

He's mentioned in the article, but not in the list. And what about Mellon?

[edit] Who on earth is this Sidener guy?

Someone should probably take this off once they've check it out, though I'm pretty certain it's a joke. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flankergeek (talk • contribs) 19:23, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Henry Ford?

I can agree with every name on this list except Henry Ford. When was Ford called a "Robber Baron?" By whom? In what context? Ford was actually considered to be quite progressive during the era when the last of the Robber Barons reigned. The Five-Dollar-Day was the epitome of progressive business-labor relations (even if the Sociological Department wasn't). And when Ford did become a tight-fisted, public-be-damned, despicable tycoon calling him a "Robber Baron" would be passé. Indeed, at the time that Ford was this way, Matthew Josephson was using the term to describe men that were by then dead a generation. Wealth alone is not a criterion for inclusion on this list.

I say Ford should be deleted from the list. --RedJ 17 00:19, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I do not think Henry Ford should be deleted from this list. I do not think the criterion for being a robber baron is strictly economics but also sociological. I think the negative sociological impacts Henry Ford's philosophical vies had with respect to ethnic populations and favoring some groups over others (because he had the economic clout to dictate these things) still affects the Detroit Area and the US auto industry today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gpeach2 (talk • contribs) 16:16, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I think there is a complete misunderstanding of what the term means if you are including Ford. Ford was anti-semitic...there is no doubt about that. But in terms of his business practices both within his company and with the competition he was incredibly progressive (for a business man). Most of the benefits of the labor movement were negotiated and agreed to first with Ford. He contributed lots to the communities, charities and educational institutions all the time. Robber Barron's were so described because of the way they bent both public and private institutions to their will and ruthlessly destroyed or swallowed the competition. Was he influential and used his clout in the Detroit area to have influence. Yes. In comparison to say JP Morgan (who just swallowed up Bear Stearns today)...was he anywhere close in business practices and was he ever referred to back then as such. No...there is no historical record or justification of that.--Thehighlndr (talk) 22:54, 17 March 2008 (UTC)