Was it worth it?

The second industrial revolution brought many new types of inventions and innovations to America. However It also caused many problems due to pollution, deadly working conditions, and we humans had to get use to it. In the article Polluting the Environment, it says "coal mining produces chemicals such as iron sulfates that enter streams and kill plants and animals living in the area."  This shows that the pollution is causing the death of plants and animals which is a terrible thing because once one animal goes away, everything else in the food web of its habitat goes down with it and before we know it everything would be gone. Also, in making human junk it shows how children are mistreated and forced into labor, turning them into "junk". This shows how industrialization, and innovation is turning children into “junk” that only knows the scary reality of how dangerous working conditions are, and has many illnesses from these horrible working conditions. In Report on Industrial Accidents in Pittsburgh it explains how 526 were killed and 500 more were injured. This shows that the working conditions and pollution were both very deadly. In all the second industrial revolution was terrible, and unworthy of its price.

The Industrial Revolution... Was it Worth the Cost?

The Industrial Revolution had some good sides, leading to things we use everyday. Even though we have these cool things, they were definitely not worth the cost, and could have been created without the price adults and especially children had to pay.
This affected not only people, but children especially. In a poster by Lewis Wickes Hine, it shows a photo of sad and dirty children, and explains that children did not get the proper treatment or pay that they deserved. Instead of getting lots of money, these children most likely had injuries or possibly diseases. Because of the low pay, families had to move into Therefore, it was not worth the cost of putting people's children in danger.
The Industrial Revolution affected a huge part of our world, the environment. With all the smoke from the factories going into the air, it caused pollution and somewhat made it harder for people to breathe. This is what caused most diseases for those who did and didn't work. Industrialization was not worth harming others.
With all the jobs and smoke in the air, many tragedies occurred. Between this, 526 people died and 509 were injured, according to a report by Crystal Eastman. This lead to depression of families and those injured. Some families would pull their children out of these jobs because of the danger, and they were not able to afford much at all. It was not worth it to be inured to killed through this time.
It was not worth the cost of what the Industrial Revolution did to many, and it should have never happened. Many were killed, injured, left with no money. The environment was polluted as well, and many easily got diseases. What we have today was not worth the poor lives of those living in the Industrial Revolution.

Was It Worth the Cost?

I do not believe that the benefits of new technologies from industrialization were worth the costs. One of the reasons it did not benefit is because it ruined the future of children who worked there. According to a picture by Lewis Wickes Hine, children become junk when they work in factories, and get barely any wages. It affected their future because they wouldn’t be able to get an education. This was because they had to get money to support their family. But also they will get barely any money at all, which could only support their family. Other things that were affected by this change is the environment. According to article titles, “Polluting the Environment,” the environment was affected heavily by pollution. Pollution spread through rivers contracting diseases. They contained iron sulfates, which killed plants and animals surrounding the area. The air got polluted from smokestacks in factories, which made it hard to see. Lastly, many accidents happened due to the increase in factories. According to the accident report written by Crystal Eastman, in three months, over 500 men have been killed while working. This means that many jobs have extremely unsafe working conditions. It also shows that bosses are unaware of the safety of their machines.

It Was Worth The Price.....or Was It?

New technologies from industrialization were NOT worth the price!

            The picture of the factory smokestack supports my argument because these smokestacks caused pollution. The picture shows negativity of how it was not worth the cost because now there is pollution everywhere.

            This excerpt from the accident report also supports my argument because Crystal Eastman described how industrial accidents impacted children.

          The “Making Human Junk” poster impacted everybody because the author on this poster was basically telling everyone that human junk was being made, and they were very negative about it.

Was industrialization worth the cost?

I think that the new technologies from industrialization were not worth the costs. The poster titled “Making Human Junk” by Lewis Wickes Hine, (1913-1914) shows how child labor is exampled. Before children went to go work at factories they were happy and were energetic. Once they go through the process of working the end up being drained from energy.  The children weren’t going to have a future and they had low wages. After working through the conditions of factories the result was that they turned into “Junk.” This is child labor due to the amount of hours worked, the low wages, and also how they have to deal with all the terrible conditions. Likewise, The Report on Industrial Accidents composed by Crystal Eastman (1916) says that from July 1, 1906 to June 30, 1907 that 526 men were killed from work related accidents in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. In addition to that, 509 men were injured from similar accidents. The opening of factories led to severe deaths. 60% of the men who died didn’t reach the prime of their working life. This means that they were still young when they passed away and there was still many years for them to work. The cause of industrialization led to many deaths and injuries of innocent people. Also, in the photograph by Detroit Publishing Company titled “Factory Smokestacks” (1890-1901) it shows how there is a lot of thick black smoke releasing from the multiple factories. There is three factories polluting into the air which is very harmful into the environment. In the bottom of the image you can see there is grass and flowers. The pollution kills plants and leads to brown and very unattractive plants. Lastly, in the article “Polluting the Environment”, the escalating number of factories led to an abundance of people arriving into the city. Many homes used coal to heat their homes and the burning coal was ejected into the atmosphere as smoke and soot. By the early 1900’s the air was contaminated with pollution in industrial cities that there was a need for streetlights during the day. Coal mining produces chemicals like iron sulfates which enter the streams and kill plants and animals in the area. As you can see industrialization can cause horrible things. For example, industrialization can lead to child labor, deaths or injuries, and pollution. In my opinion I think that industrialization was not worth the cost and we could have found better technologies.

Industrialization, Was it Worth the Cost?

Though industrialization did start a whole new era of 20st century gadgets, the entire process of industrialization was not worth the cost. According to the article “Polluting the Environment,” pollution was a huge problem during the Industrial Revolution.  During the time of the Industrial Revolution, pollution was the worst that it had ever been.  This was because there was a greater number of factories that were established.  These factories let out so much pollution that street lights were needed on every street.  Also, the chemicals let into the air gave out diseases though the air.  The picture “Factory Smokestacks” published by the Detroit Publishing Company, illustrates all this information.  The smoke that is being produced by the factory is let into the air by the smokestacks which, as a result, caused many people to get diseases like typhoid fever.  This pollution also affected the water and hurt all the animals under the water.  Pollution was one of the many reasons that the industrialization was not worth the cost.  Along with the problem of pollution though factories, factories are also the culprit of the next issue, the numerous-work accidents. An Excerpt from “Report on Industrial Accidents in Pittsburgh” published by Crystal Eastman indicates that working in a factory is unsave.  In 1907, 526 men died by work-accident, and 509 men were injured. They got injured by all of the harsh conditions of the factory and dangerous machines that the factory used. This hurt many more people and the entire society because many of the jobs that the Industrial Revolution provided were unsafe and these jobs were mainly the ones to choose from.  Likewise, children working in factories was another issue due to the Industrial Revolution.  In the photograph “Making Human Junk,” by Lewis Hine Wickes, it shows the process of how kids look before and after working in a factory.  This picture is yet another visual representation of the damage that industrialization did to the children of America. By looking dirty and tired, this picture shows the price of a job at a young age.  Also working at these factories are preventing the children to receive an education or pursue their dreams.  For all of these reasons and more, the Industrial Revolution was not worth the cost.

Was this worth the cost? NOPE

I do not believe that the benefits of new technologies from industrialization were worth the costs. “Making human Junk” was a poster was created by Lewis Wickes Hine during 1913-14. This was to draw attention to child labor. In the poster “Making human Junk” the children were said to have low wages and no future. The children were put to work to earn money for their families. The impact of this was turning the children into human “junk.” A report by Crystal Eastman said that there were 526 men killed during three months.  Imagine what it would do in one year. The hospitals received 509 men injured, not including the deaths. The outcome of this was danger and risking others lives. The picture by Detroit Publishing Co. shows that the factories are polluting the air. As more and more factories came up more and more pollution came with it. The outcomes of this was endangering people that were working there, destroying the environment, and also polluting the air around.

Was it Worth the Cost? Yes... Yes it Was

I believe that the benefits of new technologies from industrialization were worth the costs. The picture of kids on Tricycles/Bicycles By The Detroit Publishing company supports my answer because one of the only ways to use transportation was the bike, and the only other main way was the trolley, and horses wasn’t that good because they couldn’t ride all day, they needed to rest. It impacted people’s lives because everyone used it, they used it for going to work, they used it for going somewhere else overall, and kids really loved it. The Interview from Harry Reece supports my answer because this shows that people loved Trolleys and any other industrial material. I impacted people’s lives because without any industrial material we wouldn’t be where we are today, and we’d still be riding horses today. And the trolley was the any other source of transportation that can drive/move all day other than the bike. And the typewriter ad supports my answer because without typewriters it wouldn’t evolve into the computer, and also, without the industrial revolution we wouldn’t even have phonographs, or really. And look today the environment isn't so bad around the country. The typewriter ad By the Detroit Publishing Company also helped us because it was a much much quicker and neater way to write something instead of using your own handwriting. The Industrial Revolution was good for the USA.

The Price is Right!

Industrialization was worth the price since it sprouted many important inventions. One reason it was worth the price was that street cars were invented. This is important since it produced a vehicle that didn’t run on an engine or an animal. This affected society by making an efficient and quick mode of transportation. Another invention created during industrialization is typewriters. These sprouted numerous opportunities in business for mainly writing quicker. According to a Remington Typewriters ad,"[typewriters are] the most durable and reliable writing-machine,". This shows that industrialization created the most effective writing machine of the time. Lastly, Industrialization helped entertainment by producing bicycles. This was both an effective mode of transportation which helped society and a fantastic source of entertainment. There are just too many upsides in industrialization for it to now be worth the price. The Price is Right!

Was it Worth the Cost? Yes or No?

The benefits of new technologies from industrialization was not worth the cost for many reasons. One reason why it was not worth the cost was because of the dreadful amounts of pollution that was created. Many factories were created and because of the machines that they required, large amounts of pollution spread around the cities. The pollution caused many cities to be very unsanitary and that made many illnesses like typhoid fever and others spread around to people. This was negatively impacting the city and the people. In addition to pollution in the cities, there was far too much child labor that was not benefiting the children at all. They were called human “Junk” for how they worked, as well has having very slim wages. The industry should not be able to spend this money on the society. Not to mention the fact that in 1906-1907 526 men were killed by work accidents in factories. 509 men were injured that same year. Jobs are too dangerous and the society is being affected by them in bad ways. This proves that new technologies from industrialization were not worth the cost.

Was Industrialization Worth All the Trouble?

No, the benefits of new technologies from industrialization was not worth all the struggle and sacrifices. One problem the industrialization created was air pollution. Air pollution affected the air and everyone living during the 20th century. All the pollution was created by the enormous amount of factories, which created dangerous jobs for many immigrants. According to “Polluting the Environment” “During the 1900’s, air pollution became so serious in cities, that some cities needed streetlights to see during the day.” Not only did the pollution affect the air but also affected the water. Sewage entered the water. The polluted water caused many diseases like typhoid fever. A picture photographed by Detroit Publishing Company, it  shows strips of smokes coming out of the smokestacks of many factories along the road. Another serious problem that industrialization created was child labor. Child labor was a serious problem for all the families that has been through child labor. Child labor was a cruel act for families and children. Child labor created quite a stir. There were many risks to child labor which created many deaths and injuries towards children. A poster created by Lewis Wickes Hine about “Making Human Junk” shows pictures of children being treated poorly. This poster describes children working in factories, “junk”. What’s cruel about child labor is that children who do work in factories spend their lives in dangerous working conditions instead of being free and getting an education through a school. Children are paid low wages, they have no future. A serious downside to child labor are the diseases that you can get from working in such horrible and dangerous working conditions. Children are too young to work!! Aside from child labor, just average horrible working conditions can injure or kill many. According to an excerpt on industrial accidents, an accident killed 526 men and injured 509 men. For these reasons, industrialization was definitely not worth the cost.

Industrialization, live or die?

In the picture Making Human Junk, it talks about industrialization and what it turns you into.This supports my argument because when kids first when to the factories they were perfect and they had no problems and they were good material but then the went through the process and they then they went to the factory for a long while and they then become junk with no future and little to no pay. According to the Accident report, 526 men were killed by work-related accidents. The hospitals of the county received over 509 men injured in such accidents. in the picture of Smoke factory stacks, it shows a factory letting out lots of smoke into the air/atmosphere causing many problems in the air such as diseases and other sicknesses. This also kills many plants and animals. Industrialization is bad for us and the environment.

Though the Deaths were Great, was the Revolution Worth it?

The benefits of new technology in this world would not be around right now if not for the industrial revolution. Though there was some cost that we had to pay for the revolution it was still so important to our economy and society today.  First, the light bulb is an invention that was patented by Thomas Edison and his team. This invention paved the future for science and future design. According to The Wizard of Menlo Park, it talked about how the electric light began to replace the gaslight and started the use of the electric car. With this information, you can conclude that the light bulb helped our future by starting the thought of new inventions like the refrigerator. This also shows that the lightbulb was an important design that reduced the amount of pollution in the air. It deducted the pollution in the air because the gas light polluted homes and the streets. Sometimes causing harm. Likewise, Edison and his team tried 1,000 ways to make the light bulb. Other inventors would have most likely given up after 1,000 tries. In this 21st century, we would probably be in the dark ages if there was no light bulb. Likewise, the typewriter was an important economic invention in the late 1800s. It gave us the idea for the printer and the computer which are both big parts of our economy and society today. The computer plays a big role in our 21st communication. It helps us communicate, write, and learn. In the poster about typewriters, it says that the Remington Typewriter was the best typewriter and the most durable and reliable. This shows that in the industrial revolution there was an incline in how sophisticated the technology was. The typewriter along with the invention of energy also helped with the inventions of texting and other forms of communication. Finally, the invention of the trolley car was a big part of our economy and how some people live today. For example in California, a numerous amount of people use trolley cars to get around because there are so many steep hills. From an excerpt from an interview with Harry Reece, it says, how Uncle Bill, a very wise and smart man, did not even know how trolley’s work. This shows that the industrial revolution was so fast paced that even brainy men did not even know how something worked. The trolley car is very common in some places and if it were to never be invented then some people would not be able to get around easily. In conclusion, I think that the industrial revolution came with prices but was still so revolutionary.  

Was it Worth the Price to Pay?

The Second Industrial revolution was not worth the cost because of many reasons. One reason was that the Second Industrial Revolution caused a lot of pollution that took years to clean up. Also pollution caused many illnesses and deaths. It also impacted the environment.According to the article “The polluted water caused typhoid fever and other diseases.” This shows how the pollution was bad and impacted the ecosystem and humans alike.Another reason the Second Industrial Revolution wasn’t worth it was child labor. Because of child labor kids won’t have a future and that they won’t be able to get jobs because they never were able to get an education. That would impact the job industry for lawyers or other important jobs. Also when they came out of the factory then the were basically just junk waiting to be thrown away.The last reason is that people got very injured working in these factories.This shows that many people died or got severely injured and that could impact their life because they may fire them then they may not be able to pay for there house. Then they would become poor all because of one accident.

The Cost Isn't Worth The People That Were Lost

In an accident report from 1906-1907 by Detroit Publishing Company “526 men were killed by work-accidents in Allegheny County,” also “the hospitals of the country received over 509 men injured in such accidents. . .” For instance the new technologies from industrialization wasn’t worth the coast with killing over 500 men.“Allegheny County loses more than 500 workmen every year,” Regardless this isn’t worth the price because of all of the work-accidents that are killing innocent men daily. Because of this deaths of young and old workmen aren’t worth the coast of new inventions and technology, these innocent lives are priceless and to work and possibly die isn’t worth new technology of the future.

In a factory smoke stocks picture from 1890-1901, it shows smoke rising from many different factories about to pollute the cities surrounding it. Under those circumstances this can cause many diseases and strep throat to people living in the cities and pollute all the air everywhere. With all of this pollution in the cities and people getting sick or not enough clean air outside. As a result it isn’t worth this pollution new technologies, because people need fresh air and with all of that pollution around them they might breathe heavily all the time because the air isn’t fresh and clean and additionally clear. More importantly in some cases it could could kill people so it’s not worth the risk for new technologies from industrialization.

In a making human junk poster from 1913 or 1914 by Lewis Wickes it says “Good material at first, high wages, the process, the product, no future and low wages,” it also refers to them as “Junk” Because of how they worked the kids long hours everyday with lower wages everyday the kids ended up as “Junk” and with no future and low wages. These poor children's miserable lives aren’t close to worth new technologies from industrialization for the future. As a result they mess up the kids lives and they don’t even remember what being happy is. They break kids lives and put them into places where they have no future at all. It isn’t worth the price of new technologies from industrialization.

Yup, it was worth the cost

The benefits of new technologies from industrialization were worth the costs. One reason for this is that it can change people's lives for the better. A second example of this is that they can produce more jobs and better technology. A third and final example of this is the transportation and toys. Industrialization had more good results than bad. One example of how benefits of new technologies from industrialization were worth the cost is in the interview with Harry Reece where it states, “When I saw my first trolley car, slipping along Cottage Grove Avenue in Chicago... without horses or... well it was just too much for me. I didn’t know what to think.” This is saying that these new technologies have effects on people and the society because they are incredible and they make the society easier to function. One example of how benefits of new technologies from industrialization were worth the cost is that they can change people's lives for the better. Another incredible example of how benefits of new technologies from industrialization were worth the cost is in the typewriter ad where it says that the Remington Typewriters, “are in greater demand than ever” and they are “The most durable and reliable writing machine.” This explains that new technologies are bringing in new jobs. This helps businesses, poor people who need jobs, immigrants, and many more. A second example of how benefits of new technologies from industrialization were worth the cost is that they can produce more jobs and better technology.  A final example of how new technologies benefit people from industrialization were worth the cost is in the Children with Bicycles photo where the children are on their bikes and they look happy. This explains that new technologies are good for kids and I can infer that they are good for jobs too. This helps businesses, people who need jobs, and kids. The last example of how new technologies benefit people from industrialization were worth the cost is the transportation and toys. The benefits of new technologies from industrialization were worth the costs. One reason for this is that it can change people's lives for the better. A second example of this is that they can produce more jobs and better technology. A third and final example of this is the transportation and toys. Industrialization was both bad and good but overall people benefit from its outcome.`

Was New Technologies of the 19th and 20th Centuries worth the cost?

I do not believe that the benefits of new technologies from industrialization were worth the costs. There was many costs that were not worth it, like pollution, child labor, and numerous factory accidents.

Children had to work in factories with low wages and they had to work for a very long time each day with no profit coming from it. Smokestacks polluted the environment with smoke, creating global warming, and many people in factories got injured and killed! THAT is why I am against the new technologies from industrialization.

Was it worth the cost... Well,According to the passage,  From 1890 to 1901 in Syracuse New York there were many factories that were in progress and people forced pollution by putting smoke in the air. Smoke is a very bad thing for anyone and everything in the world. Smoke can put an effect on people like when people smoke the smoke goes to their lungs and many horrible things can happen I highly recommend you do not make that decision.  According to the text, To sell their new writer they had to promote people to buy the typewriter by making ads for typewriters and put the promotions on newspaper back then.  This passage was very much so bias in favor and I think that No it wasn’t worth the price.  The typewriter was a resource for people to get in touch with each other.  In my opinion I think that the typewriter was a good source but I also think that if the typewriter was really worth the cost than I think that people would’ve used it more often for example, Many people use Iphones now a days many times a day and back then I think that the typewriter could’ve used more popularity by the item.  Other than that I think the typewriter was a great resource.

Was it worth the price with so many risks?

Industrialization affected the environment and the lives of many people. I do not feel that industrialization was necessary if there were so many risks involving people's lives. According to Hine, Lewis Wickes. Making Human Junk, 1912, “No future and low wages”. Children start out as “good material” but then end up as “junk with no future”. Children work in factories and this turns them into “junk”. This shows that industrialization impacts kids too. They end up “having no future” and some of them get low wages which turned this situation into negative child labor. According to Eastman, Crystal. Excerpt from Report on Industrial Accidents in Pittsburgh, 1907, “526 men were killed by work-accidents”. Many people get hurt or die because of industrialization. With many people getting hurt or dying the population goes down. This also affects industrialization because less people will be able to work. With men who end up dying and children who “have no future” industrialization seems very negative.  Also in the picture from Library of Congress, Factory Smokestacks, Syracuse, New York, between 1890 and 1901, there is a huge amount of pollution coming out of the factories. Industrialization did not just affect the lives of people, but also the environment. Pollution was spread from the factories. This shows that lives of people were impacted, as well as kids’ future. The environment was also taken over by pollution. All of this was caused by industrialization.

Industrialization Was Not Worth The Price!

I don’t think industrialization was worth the cost even if it did bring us all sorts of new technology. Even though good things came from it, the way we got those things was cruel and dangerous. The poster of “human junk” shows how the process of child labor goes. It shows how the kids start with high wages and good materiel. As they work, they wages get smaller and it says they have no future. This process shows how they turn the kids into “human junk”. Kids should be able to get a free education but instead they are having to work everyday in harsh and horrible conditions. Their bosses are mean, it is hard to breathe, they get hurt, and overall child labor was a serious issue. Another reason why it was not worth the cost is because according to Crystal Eastman, many deaths were caused by working in factories. The accident report shows how working in the factories is dangerous. I says that from July 1st, 1906 to July 30th, 1907, 526 men were killed from accidents while working in dangerous factories. The text explains that there is no bright side to industrialization and it is a waste of the youths strength and skill. By letting the workers work in these conditions the factory owners are basically saying that they would sacrifice human lives for some products. I think that’s beyond horrible. The last reason why industrialization was bad is because it polluted. For instance the picture published by the Detroit Publishing Company shows this pollution at a factory. This picture shows the smoke coming up in the air from the factory. This means that the factory severely pollutes the environment and that is a huge downside to industrialization. Industrialization does not just harm people, it harms the environment as well. Animals and plants dies from this pollution and that is bad for their habitat and the food chain. Also pollution could hurt farmers business because crops die. The laser reason why pollution is harmful is because when the crops and animals die, it prevents people from getting enough food. That is why I think that industrialization was not worth the costs.

Was It Worth the Cost

I do not believe that the benefits of new technologies from industrialization were worth the costs. According to discovery education 3.1 explore 10 it says “air pollution became so heavy in industrial cities that people needed streetlights to see during the day.” This pollution coming out of the factories affected them so much so the lights would have to be on during the day. That would take up a lot of electricity and that means it would cost a lot of money. According to the poster by Lewis Wickes Hine's it says “Good material at first, then after they have no future and low wages and are now junk.” They put the kids into child labor so early in their life that when they would grow up they would have no future. They had no friends, did not go to school, and their families were very poor. It was very hard for immigrants that were children in the late 1800’s and the early 1900’s. According to the poster by The Detroit Publishing Company smoke comes out of the pipes that causes health concerns and pollution throughout the city. This would cause illnesses to spread around the city. Back then they did not have a lot of cures for diseases or viruses so a lot of people were in danger and could die. According to the article it says “526 men were killed by work-accidents in Allegheny County.” Working was very dangerous for children. In coal mines they could fall down in a pit and get smashed until they die by coal. If they work in factories they could get harsh diseases that could kill them. This is all caused by child labor. That is why I do not believe that the benefits of new technologies from industrialization were worth the costs.

Was it Worth the Cost?

I do not believe that the benefits of new technologies from industrialization were worth the costs. According to the poster “Making Human Junk” by Lewis Wickes Hine, When working in these factories the children get no wages and no education and they end up as “junk”. This is not worth the cost because the children are going to have “no future”. In the article of “Accident Report” by Crystal Eastman,  It tells a story of  526 men were killed by work-accidents in a year. It also talks about how 70% of the men that were killed are skilled laborers. Having this many people get killed is unacceptable.In the picture of the “Factory of Smoke” by Detroit Publishing Company , the smoke is from the Factory Smokehouse which is polluting the environment.  In conclusion I do not believe that the benefits of new technologies from industrialization were worth the cost.

Industrialization = Not Worth the Cost!

Industrialization was not worth the cost at all. First, the poster by Lewis Wickes Hines titled “Making Human Junk,” shows how children’s lives are affected by working in factories. They get very sick and it affects them a lot healthwise and mentally. It affects the mentally by showing them that kids need to work hard jobs to support their family which shouldn’t happen. This should never happen to them. Next, In the picture taken and published by Detroit Publishing Company shows pollution coming out of factories. There is lots of smoke coming out and going into the air. This pollutes the air and makes it dirty. According to Discovery Education 3.2 explore 10 “Polluting the Environment,” “By the early 1900s, air pollution became so heavy in industrial cities that people needed streetlights to see during the day.” This was really bad and the pollution also killed plants and animals. Lastly, In the accident report written by Crystal Eastman it states “That is, from July 1, 1906, to June 30, 1907 - 526 men were killed by work accidents in the Allegheny County.” This was a lot of people in only one year. Also this was only in one county, imagine how many other people died in other places. This was a real problem that should not have happened. In the article it went on to say that 500 more men were killed in the next years, meaning that no one did anything about it anyway. In conclusion industrialization was not worth the cost.

Was it Worth the Cost?

The benefits of new technologies from the industrialization was not worth the cost. As the number of factories increased, cities became overcrowded. Factories continued to produce pollution, which caused the air to be filled with smoke and soot. Cities often had poor sanitation, which caused a lot of people to get sick from typhoid and more. In a photo by Lewis Wickes Hines (1913-1914), it showed some kids covered with smoke and soot. Children in the photograph were covered in soot, and were often working long hours in factories. It also said that children would have no future and low wages. The children should be getting an education, or just having fun while playing outside; not working long hours in dirty, unsafe factories. As a result, many children didn’t get an education. In fact,  more accidents were happening in factories. In the accident report, (1906-1907) 526 men were killed by work-accidents and another 509 men were injured. People were often injured when they were working, causing factories to be unsafe. Meanwhile, factories were polluting the air. In the photo published by Detroit Publishing Company (1890-1901), you can see that smoke is rising out of the factories. This killed many animals, along with plants. It also caused some cities to be unsafe with the heavy air pollution. Overall, the new technologies from the industrialization was not worth the cost.

Total War: Mandatory or Destructive

In my opinion total war was needed, because the south wouldn't surrender any other way. This is because if they didn't lose what they love, than there wouldn't be any other point to surrender, except killing all the soldiers. Killing all the soldiers is effective, yet it is morally wrong, and could lead to more war. Yes you could talk your way out, but would that actually work, because the Union has tried it before, but has never worked ever. It is okay to left them suffer, because it is better than killing all of them. If you killed all of them, than there would be no reason to keep the country together.

Siege and Total War

I think that everyone in the Union and CSA wants this war to be over. The Civil War keeps getting worse and worse and I think everyone just wants it to be over. So in my opinion, using siege and total war was necessary because it would bring us closer to the end of the war and closer to the south surrendering. What I don't think is right, is that Sherman burnt down people's houses and innocent civilians were left living in caves, eating rats and horses. Although, like I said, I agree with this action of total war and siege because it will bring the war closer to the end.

Going too far

During hard times in the Civil War, many people suffered from savage fighting, especially during the battle of Vicksburg and Sherman's March to the sea.  Two things that happened during the battles were siege and total war. Both of these were extreme tactics the Union used to beat the Confederate soldiers.  Though the Union thought that these tactics were just, I think that they took the battles to more elevated levels than needed.  Therefore, I do not think that siege and total war were justified.  To not only make the soldiers suffer but to make entire towns, including civilians, suffer is going to far.  Yes, these people went against the Union and their cause, but they were not the ones fighting so they were not the ones that should have been in danger.  This is why I think that total war and siege were unjustified.

Was Siege and Total War necessary?

I think that siege and total war was not necessary to win the war because it was unfair to the people at Vicksburg, Siege means to cut of all supplies, and total war means to destroy all military and civilian resources. I think that total war and siege was not necessary in the war.

Siege and Total War. Are they Justified?

Siege is when you cut off all supplies from entering an area; forcing surrender. Total War is to destroy all civilian and military resources. So, are these tactics justified? I think they are not justified. I think this because both siege and total war made is so that the civilians were greatly punished, even though they were not involved in the war. Their houses got burned down, and they had to eat rats and other gross things. They did not deserve to be punished like this because they were not part of the war and they did nothing wrong. 

Siege or Fire? None or Both?

Yes, I think that siege and total war are necessary because without them there would be even more deaths and even more casualties. I see why some people think that they are bad. Even if they are, they are necessary to win the war. Siege and total war were necessary to win the war.

Siege And Total War, Is This Necessary?

So when people burn and destroy stuff now would you allow it? Well I wouldn't, but back then this was a war strategy, to destroy and burn down everything that is the confederates. I would think they took this thought just a wee little too far, but the union thought that this was a good tactic and that everyone should do it. But if you were general Ulysses S. Grant would you do it? If you were General William sherman would you do this? Well I certainly wouldn't do this, destroying and burning down people's houses is too far. If I was on the union I would want to win but I also don't want to destroy and tear apart our union. So I say that this is a bad idea and that it is tearing part the country.

Total War and Siege VS Justified

Total war is a stratagy where you burn down EVERYTHING.No mercy. kill everything that can help the enemy is that justified? Siege is where you cut off all supplies and wait until the enemy surrenders. Both of these are kinda cruel but siege at least gives them a little mercy. So in the civil war I think using siege is justified because after it never said that you can't give the civilians food after.  But total war is horrible and whoever does it is cruel.

Was Siege and Total War necessary?

I think that total war and siege was not necessary. It was not fair for the people who were living at Vicksburg. I thought that it was not right for them to use this strategy. There was women and children on at Vicksburg. Once the Union surrounded the area, they also blocked the way for supplies to come there and for them to get food supplies. Once they ran out of food the people were starving and had to start eating rats and horses. This was bad because people were starving.

Siege and Total War - Is It Necessary?

Siege and total war is not necessary. I think this because the union shouldn't do anything they want to win this war, and they shouldn't have to hurt people and their property.  Also, what did the South do so wrong to them besides slavery? There should be a reason the union is burning everything, otherwise, it should not be necessary.

Siege or Total War, Are They Justified Tactics? Should We Use Them Anymore?

Is siege and total war justified tactics of war? Yes they are. The battles of the civil war were ruthless and bloody. Many civilians were affected anyway, so since these tactics affected them greatly it did not matter as much. Many civilians may have died or were put in terrible places from these strategies they still work. One side of an army in the civil war had to do all they could to win. Also, since people were in those specific territories they supported the enemy, technically making them the enemy. Since they were in the way and these strategies were somewhat aimed towards them, it didn''t matter. The South did awful things like slavery, and they deserve it. The North had to be ruthless to win and these tactics were justified.

Siege and Total War, but could there be more?

I know i'm not supposed to do this but I like Siege but don't like Total war. I don't like total war because burning down a whole area that you could take over is not good for the Union. THEY COULD OF HAVE MORE LAND!!! I like Siege because they did it the right way and took over the mississippi river instead of BURNING IT, C'mom William T. Sherman. That's what I think.

Siege And Total War Were Useful?

Siege and total war were very helpful and useful. Siege helped the confederate army starve and lose power. Total War put an official stop to railroads shipping in goods and other things the army needed. This was the ending of the war because the confederate army was basically being tortured and could not handle it much longer. I don't find this fair because it put other people who were not fighting in torture. However, the war did not have rules so they were aloud. There for they had the right to win because they fought fairly.

Total War: Was it necessary?

Siege and Total war was kind of necessary. I mean in order to return the south to the Union I guess it was necessary. In order to make everything right again it was totally necessary. Now, was it right of course not, but for the cause  yes it was.

The Siege and Total War Aren't Neccassary

I don't think using siege and total war is necessary because there are some innocent Confederates who don't deserve for their belongings and resources to be destroyed and to have to eat mice, horses, and tree bark. I don't think it is right because I think the Union is going a little too harsh on the Confederates to make them starve and to burn all of their belongings.

Are Total War and Siege a Good War Tactic?

I think that using siege and total war is a good millitary tactic because it is a war and the civillians have to face the consequences. In other wars many civillians died. It is a war and these tactics are good idea for trying to win the war. These tactics gave the Confederate army trouble defending Vicksburg. The point of the battle was to keep America together and if this is what they had to do then you got to do it.

Was siege and total war necessary?

I don't think using siege and total war is necessary because I don't think that innocent women and children should have to starve and possibly burn. They used this tactic to win the war, but I thought it was a lot more brutal than it should have been. I bet they could have figured out ways to win instead of this. I'm sure they could have figured something else out rather than possibly killing children.

Are the Unions Tactics Justified?

I think it is justified though to use these tactics to win the war because you gotta do what you gotta do. They could have just sieged on the troops not the helpless civilians. They deserved this because they had slavery and hurting the helpless slaves.

Siege and total war

I don't think that the soldiers in the north are not aloud to break down homes and kill the some innocent people in the south. Some of the southerners didn't have slaves and they shouldn't be killed if they are just living a normal life in a cottage with a couple of children. I think that it is not a better way for the southerns to surrender because some of the southerners were just people that were not in the war and they have never had slaves. Some Southerns.

Super-Duper Siege

I believe that siege is a very smart and necessary war strategy. There are no rules of war, there for siege is a great, efficient way to capture enemy troops and territory. Siege worked well, since the Union ended up gaining land while using it in Georgia and Vicksburg. Siege worked well and there for it was both smart and creative to use siege against the Confederates.

Was It Neccesary

I think it is not ok for the union to struggle because I don't think that people deserve fr their homes to explode and struggle in homes also many people don't deserve to get shot and other things like that.  I think overal things were crazy in the south back then and they id not get the  respect they should have gotten.

Was It Necessary To Use Siege And Total War Against The Confederates In The Civil War.

Personally I think that it was very much so necessary and justified to use siege and total war in the war. I think that it was necessary or it was going to get done to themselves. It was a very scary time for the Confederates and the Union. They had to go to desperate measures so less Union soldiers died. It was the only way.

Total War and Siege Justified?

I don't think that Total War and Siege was justified because it affected all the civilians. I don't think that the civilians should have been affected because they were starving too. I don't think that using siege and total war is necessary. I think that they could have used a different tactic, so the civilians weren't affected. The civilians also starved. Everyone is human and has feelings. I thought that the Union could have used a different tactic instead.

John Brown the martyr or murderer?

John Brown was a murderer because he killed many people. He did not have the right to do that yet he risked his life to free slaves. According to the 1st amendment he was aloud to think and say whatever he wanted but not the right to do what he wanted. He had a strong opinion about owning slaves and decided to express his feelings. I do not think he expressed his feelings the right way but he was just trying to help slaves. John Brown just wanted slaves to be free and treated fairly.

Martyr or Murderer? Which was John Brown?

In my opinion John Brown is a murderer.  John Brown did fight for a cause and die because of his beliefs which is the definition of a martyr, but when you think about it, didn’t he kill more people then he helped?  When John Brown attacked the arsenal, a big attack broke and the only ones who were defending John Brown were his sons.  No slaves.  He hurt more people then he helped because he did not weaponized the slaves, but instead he killed many people, who might have even been free soilers.  John Brown also attracted a federal building which is unconstitutional. John Brown was a an extremist who did not know when to stop.  During the Kansas Nebraska Act, a pro-slavery possy attacted and some violence broke out and they killed a man.  In revenge of their act of violence John Brown (anti-slavery) and his followers killed 5 men and boys which was much more extreme than the pro-slavery possy.  Along with killing men and boys he held 60 people hostage which was going way too far.  

Violence is not the only way to get your point across.  Sometimes a great public speaker can change and influence the world through passion and thoughtfulness.  When you think about it, what did John Brown really accomplish?  How many people did he influence?  Not many.  John Brown while he may be brave, should not be known as the hero that some people know of as him today.

John Brown...Murderer or Martyr?

I think that John Brown is a murderer. I think this because Brown had this plan to start a slave uprising, that would apparently help the slaves escape. He wanted to hand out and distribute weapons to enslaved African Americans and have them join him and fight with him. Instead of getting many slaves to join him, John was left with just him and his sons to fight. Together, John and his sons captured 60 people, and murdered 5 men and boys. This was wrong of John Brown to do, and although he wanted slavery to end, he should not have tried to end it with violence. In the end, he did not even stop slavery because of his act of violence.

A Legend to the North, A Terrorist to the South, But What Do YOU Think?

John Brown was a martyr because he may have planned an uprising and  made it happen, but then was sentenced for treason and punished to death. This makes him a martyr because a martyr is someone that was sentenced to death because of their beliefs, and John Brown believed that slavery was wrong. He believed he had to fight to stop it. Technically, he was known as a terrorist to the South, and when the flag was at half mast when he died, the south was furious because he’s being honored for killing so many people. Meanwhile, the north praised his decision because they’re abolitionists and they hate slavery, and they want it to be stopped. John Brown said in his note, that the fight between slavery would be fixed only with a war, and that nothing else would fix it. However, I don’t support slavery either, so I support John’s decision, even though some people died. This is why I think he’s a martyr.

John Brown a Murder

In my opinion I think that John Brown was a murder because he killed innocent people who owned slaves. Even though no slaves joined John, he still kept killing so now it was for no reason and that made him look even worse.  Also in his quote he says “I John Brown am now quite certain that the crimes of this guilty land will never be purged away but with blood.” Which means there will be no other way than war and death to end big problems which shows he thinks he needs to kill to end slavery. John Brown definitely went over the limit when he killed 5 people. I was personally glad when he got executed because I think that he 100% needed a death penalty for his horrible actions.

Was John Brown a murderer or a martyr?

I think that John Brown was a martyr. I think he was a martyr because he died for what he believed in. The only people fighting besides him was his sons. He died for his beliefs and that's why he is a martyr. He risked his life to make sure his beliefs will happen. He was trying to start a slave rebellion, however did not have enough reinforcements. He never gave up and kept trying to help his cause. He eventually got caught and was sent to jail. He was sent to the death sentence and was going to be executed. He died from supporting his beliefs.

John Brown: The Terrorist or The Martyr

In my opinion John Brown is a murderer. I think this because you are allowed to peacefully protest and it would be legal, but it is illegal to protest and use violence. He should have used words. I do not a agree with the fact that he killed men and children and captured 60 people. His point of view of trying to stop slavery is right in my opinion, but I do not think he should have used violence. He should have peacefully protested.

The Person Between Martyr, and Murderer. John Brown

John Brown. Known as a martyr in the North, and a murderer in the South. So which one is he? In my opinion I think John Brown is a murderer. I think this, because even though his beliefs were to get rid of slavery, he decided to kill everybody in a southern territory, and take it over. I believe that killing for a political reason, like slavery, is wrong because it could be handled differently. Killing people is never the only way to solve a conflict between two sides. Personally I would give a speech in the south to convince southerners to get rid of slavery, instead of killing. Since he never solved the problem of slavery it was pointless. All he did was start a bloody war between the North and South.

Murderer or Martyr? John Brown

I think that John Brown was a murderer because he may have been fighting for his beliefs, but he did not have to kill more than 10 people. This includes, 5 men and 5 boys. In doing this he started a Guerrilla war and in all 200 people died. Sure slavery was horrific, however he could have snuck into some houses and let the slaves free instead of going for the amory and starting a Guerrilla war. This is not a good plan, but would have been better than what he actually did. So for these reasons I think he was a murderer.

The Crazy Man of John Brown

John Brown was a murderer in my opinion because he wanted to kill and threaten people to death.  John Brown believed that if he sacrificed his life and purposely died he would have a second life.  It turns out there is no such thing as a second life.  John Brown was proud of the harm he did to land and people.  I think that he was a murderer because he wanted everything to go right for him and he took his job as a killer.  I guess John Brown loved killing and threatening for a job. John brown is a guaranteed murderer.

John Brown is a Psychopath, Who Stole Guns and Caused a Bloodbath

John Brown is a murderer. He made an awful decision for how to free the slaves. I don’t think it was just to start such a riot. It was unfair for his children since they must have been pressured by their father to fight with him. It would’ve been better if Brown had gone to a plantation with various slaves and secretly at night helped the slaves escape in a nonviolent manner. He is crazy! He said god told him to murder people. John Brown is a psycho with a gun. John Brown is a terrible role model. Don't model yourself after a murderer.

John Brown- Murderer or Martyr?

Was John Brown a good or bad guy? It depends on your point of view, he had a good reason to fight and die for. I think John Brown was a murderer because he led a slave revolt that did not work and killed innocent citizens. He believed that god told him that it was his job to end slavery. If he wanted to end slavery he shouldn’t have tried to end it with violence. There are many other ways to do it like giving a speech or something that’s calming and not violent. He killed innocent people, innocent kids, adults, elderly, people who believed in slavery. He wanted to start a war just on slavery because he believed that slavery should not exist in nor the South or the North.

Is John Brown A Murderer Or A Martyr?

A martyr is someone who fights for their beliefs. He was a person who fought for his beliefs and wanted to end slavery forever. He risked his life to help stop slavery in the south. He secretly went in the gun house to get the guns and to get slaves to join him to end slavery forever. He was caught and his sons were killed when the marines came. He was executed on Dec. 2, 1859. He was someone who fought for his beliefs. This was okay that he killed lots of people because it was part of his beliefs. He was an abolitionist so he hated slaves. He was a Martyr.

John Brown: Murderer

John Brown is a murderer. He had killed 200 people before getting hung. I think that the South is right. He is a terrorist. I think violence was the only way to stop him, and that John Brown is stupid for killing people just for a revolution and nothing came out of it. I think he wasn't very smart since he had to kill so many people for the 'cause'.

Why John Brown was a murderer.

I think that John is a murderer because he killed a lot of people in the south. No slaves joined him probably because they knew that killing was wrong, even to stop the terrible thing that we know as slavery. Now, sure he did it to stop slavery, but that doesn’t mean you need to put your family’s life in danger. John Brown wanted to end slavery right then and there and obviously that did not work. The thing is he didn’t stop after he saw that no slaves would join him so why would we keep going. Due to the information I have I think that he would rather end slavery than stay alive.

John Brown is a Murderer

John Brown is a murderer because he might be an extreme abolitionist, but he took it way too far. John Brown has no limit whatsoever and does not know when he has crossed the line. He has the right to think and say whatever he wants about people who own slaves, but they did not deserve to die out of nowhere even if he thought having slaves was wrong. He also did not have any right to kill them. I think that he should have done something more peaceful for example, a peaceful protest.

John Brown The Psycho Murder-Martyr

I think John Brown is a martyr because he risked his life for poor slaves who have to work 24/7. It is just because of their race. Even though Brown was crazy he had a good point. He shouldn’t have killed people but it still make him a martyr. Slavery was a terrible time in US history. He was an extreme abolitionist. An abolitionist doesn’t support slavery. He died for what he believed in. People in the south saw his as a murderer. On December 2nd he was hanged and he died knowing what he was doing is right.

Was John Brown a Martyr or a Murder

John Brown is a murderer. He just kills people that have slavery but what if some of them are nice to their slaves and John just kills that didn't deserve to be killed. He killed five men because they didn’t agree with him or his sons. I think that John should have not killed these people but he could handle this a different way. Some people thought that he was a terror in that time period and I agree with those people.

Why I Think John Brown is a Murderer

He went on a rampage in the south and killed a lot of people with his five sons willing to die for his cause. They hoped that slaves would join their rebellion but it did not work and they were trapped by the marines and the southerners. I think he is a murderer and not a martyr because he killed lots of people and slavery is not really a religious thing. He was convicted of treason and that led to death. On December 2nd, 1860 John Brown was executed. He was an extreme abolitionists which means that he was against slavery. This rebellion started in Virginia where he got trapped in the arsenal by the southerners and the United States Marines. In my opinion he was not a martyr, he was just a murderer because how he went about slavery.

John Brown a Martyr Not a Murderer

John Brown was a martyr. He went on a mission to try and free slaves by killing the owners in Harpers Ferry, West Virginia. People should have no right to declare human beings as property. He was defending good people, and sane people by killing the people who were taking and treating others very poorly. He tried to free slaves, which can be in no way wrong. He was fighting, for good things, and anyone who believes it is right to hold someone as property, should have serious consequences. If slaves had joined his army, the fight would have lasted even longer and perhaps more people would have died. So, maybe it was a good thing he was unsuccessful, in this mission, but he had a valid point and strong idea to fight for what he believed.

John Brown: Murderer or Martyr

I think John Brown is a martyr because he thought that god chose him to do something about the slaves and wanted to free them. So he tried to kill lots of people and killed 5 men and boys and even wanted to burn down a whole town to free all slaves. Then he got stabbed in the shoulder which then lead him going to jail and getting executed for treason and something else that I couldn't find.

Was John Brown a Murderer or a Martyr?

I think that John Brown was a murderer because he killed many people that were innocent. He was a extreme abolitionist, but he could have used a different tactic rather than to kill people. Many people were innocent, and I thought he was honestly pretty crazy. He shouldn’t have killed people that were innocent. John Brown killed 5 men and children, that were innocent. So that makes him a murderer.

John Brown: Martyr to the North, Murderer to the South

John Brown is a martyr because he killed people because of his religious beliefs. Even if some people don’t agree with his beliefs, he did. Even if his intentions were killing people, he did it for a good cause. In the present everyone hates slavery, so why would people today think that he is a murderer. The big question is, was the cause big enough for him to be considered a martyr. For him, slavery was the worst thing in the world, and if I were in his shoes, I might’ve done the same thing.

The Ultimate Abolitionist, John Brown

John Brown is a murderer because he will stop at nothing, including murder for his cause.  He threatened to burn the village and he said he would not go down without a fight. This is terrible and I think he deserved his fate, death. He committed treason and he says the only solution to this problem involved blood. This is why John Brown is a murderer.