Select the boxes in the table to compare and contrast warren harding and calvin coolidge’s policies and actions.

Harding - raised tariffs.

Coolidge - frugal policies.

Both - pro-business agenda, reduced world wide armament.

Explanation:

Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge were the 29th and 30th Presidents of the United States. Both of their terms were during 1920's.

While their policies differentiated in some aspects, in other they were quite similar. For example, they were both republicans, who had a pro-business agenda.

But, living in the aftermath of World War I, Harding's main political goal was to protect american industries and agriculture to secure postwar recovery and avoid recession. Main strategy for this was to impose and raise tariffs. Coolidge continued with this policies (with keeping the tariffs high, but not raising them anymore), trying to protect american manufacturing against foreign competition. Harding's tariffs were at the record high by that time.

Also, they were both aiming to reduce world wide armament to prevent another disaster like the WWI. While Harding urged for lower defence costs during his campaign, this was not a major issue for him. He enacted an international agreement for reducing naval fleets of major powers at that time - USA, UK and Japan. On the other side, Calvin Coolidge's primary foreign policy initiative was the Kellog-Briand Pact of 1928, with the goal of renuncing war, as an instrument of national policy. Even though this Pact was never fully achieved, he managed to cut spending for the military, which leads us to his broader policies of cutting military spendings.

As oposed to Harding who was a protectionist, Calvin Coolidge believed in the minimal involvement of the state in order to produce government surplus, which is why he is known by his frugal policies.

imperialism and colonization in 1936

part of the politics series

basic forms of government

power structure

separation

associated state dominion chiefdom

federalism

federation confederation devolution

integration

empire hegemony unitary state

administrative division

power source

democracy

power of many

direct representative liberal social demarchy others

oligarchy

power of few

anocracy aristocracy plutocracy kakistocracy kraterocracy stratocracy timocracy meritocracy technocracy geniocracy noocracy kritarchy particracy ergatocracy netocracy

autocracy

power of one

despotism dictatorship military dictatorship

others

anarchy theocracy

power ideology

monarchy vs. republic

socio-political ideologies

absolute legalist

constitutional

parliamentary directorial semi-presidential presidential

authoritarian vs. libertarian

socio-economic ideologies

tribalism despotism feudalism colonialism distributism anarchism socialism communism totalitarianism

global vs. local

geo-cultural ideologies

commune city-state national government intergovernmental organisation world government

politics portal

vte

an empire is a sovereign state functioning as an aggregate of nations or people that are ruled over by an emperor or another kind of monarch. the territory and population of an empire is commonly of greater extent than the one of a kingdom.[1]

an empire can be made solely of contiguous territories, such as the austro-hungarian empire or the russian empire, or of territories far remote from the homeland, such as a colonial empire. aside from the more formal usage, the word empire can also refer colloquially to a large-scale business enterprise (e.g. a transnational corporation), a political organisation controlled by a single individual (a political boss), or a group (political bosses).[2] the word empire is associated with such other words as imperialism, colonialism, and globalization. empire is often used to describe a displeasure to overpowering situations.[3]