Articles of Confederation 2022 by Lindsey D

WAR SCHWACH

daba23 — 2022-03-03 16:03:45 UTC

Die Konföderationsartikel waren schwach und nutzlos, da sie die Bildung von Rebellionen erleichterten

Marco

2022-03-03 16:04:11 UTC

“Were the Articles of Confederation a good foundation for the United States government or not?” :

The Articles of Confederation were not a good foundation for the United States :

It had no real system of government. It just said do this and this and we’ll be happy…if you don’t…well that would be bad.
There weren’t enforced taxes, so it was optional meaning that no one would pay the government taxes because they didn’t want to.
Finally, the government had no real currency because the money was worth nothing.

Weak- Brendan

brma23 — 2022-03-03 16:05:29 UTC

There was no discipline and no one met much. They were all pretty much there own countries who said "hi" like every 6 months. There was no organization and no one knew what was going on with money.

WEAK
1. No money organization
2. No discipline
3. No unity

patrick

2022-03-03 16:06:25 UTC

the article was AMAZING. in theory. the main problem was that "the states ignored Congress's requests". without cooperation, it sucked

dan

dafr23 — 2022-03-03 16:06:52 UTC

The article of confederation were weak.

it was litterally "do this or else" but nothing happens if you dont do it

government didn't earn money cus taxes werent enforces and the money was completely different in each state

they litterally only came together when they needed something bad

ash

2022-03-03 16:08:07 UTC

Although it gave the people the freedom they desired, the Articles of Confederation was not a good foundation for the united states because of the following reasons:

1) It puts way to much trust into the people, and people aren’t really that trustworthy, especially when they have power

2) It keeps the country from earning money, since people can just say no

3) There was no body experienced who knows what they’re doing specifically in charge, and the people don’t know what they’re really doing

Stratton

2022-03-03 16:19:40 UTC

Gur Negvpyrf bs Pbasrqrengvba jrer n ubeevoyr vqrn orpnhfr lbh pna'g unir n tbireazrag gung pna'g rira gnk vgf pvgvmraf. Nyfb, gur snpg gung vg jnf fb ybbfr jnf n ceboyrz orpnhfr gurl pbhyqa'g trg n tbbq qrpvfvba cnfg nyy bs gurz.

rot13

Krita

2022-03-03 18:07:27 UTC

The Articles of Confederstion was not a good foundation. It didn't really do anything, and instead of brining everyone together, it created more problems.
1. didn't create a "government"
2.There was no form of money
3. It didn't create the firm league of friendship it was supposed too

Jeremy C

2022-03-04 03:43:20 UTC

I don’t think the Articles of Confederation were a good foundation. There wasn’t an actual government, it was just a group of friends trying to compromise on something. They need to have a group of people that are superior than others to keep everything in check instead of being extremely loose. There also wasn’t a form of money which made them all broke. There also wasn’t any discipline so if you didn’t do something they asked nothing would happen.

Liam M

2022-03-04 13:59:16 UTC

The Articles of Confederation were not a good foundation. It was very weak and didn't have a backbone. They were very lost and we were so focused on winning the war that they didn't think about what they would do after.
1) They didn't have a form of currency
2) They didn't have any type of leader
3) They also didn't enforce the law which lead to riots.

Cece

2022-03-04 14:00:29 UTC

The Articles of Confederation was not a good foundation. There was no government to begin with, it was just a group of wealthy, "old" men. The Articles didn't allow them to assign taxes either, so they didn't have money to repay people who helped them or to have an army or anything to help them. They also didn't have a leader so no one could support the law, and that led people to start riots.

The Articles of Confederation

krcu23 — 2022-03-04 14:00:53 UTC

I think that they were a good idea, ON PAPER! I believe that it was people that that screwed them. It is our fault that it failed.

MMMMM NO

2022-03-04 16:01:49 UTC

the articles of confederation were a extremely inneffective way of running a gov because it:
prevented proper funding
created infighting
was impossible to agree on issues

annie

ansh23 — 2022-03-04 16:02:56 UTC

the aoc was not a good foundation. it puts way to much trust into the people and people are selfish. It also created problems with creating money as well as only coming together when they were rebellion or plotting something malicious.

Nate

2022-03-04 16:04:35 UTC

I think it sucked because you would have to have 13 people all agree. I feel like they should have made it majority not unaminius. They couldn't really do anything and the country probally wasn't going to last long if it stayed

real photo of how the country ended up after the articles of confederation

page23 — 2022-03-04 16:05:47 UTC

Jacob

2022-03-06 22:10:20 UTC

I believe this because they essentially just asked people to pay taxes and barely any people would pay taxes out of free will. Also, we had no way to punish people if they didnt pay taxes, this caused the government to have no money whatsoever.

Ryan

rydi24 — 2023-03-09 13:53:25 UTC

I belive that the Articles of confederation were a bad foundation. First of all... who leads a country without any people to protect it. no law enforcement means that anyone could do anything they want it without consequence. Another reason they were a bad foundation was because they were just confusing for all the states. Every state literaly had their own currency, how do i know how much each is worth. Finnaly they had to ASK for taxes. Like personnly i would say no given the chance. The Articles of confederation were a bad... Not even bad, a horrible foundation for the U.S

Alex

2023-03-09 13:53:28 UTC

I think it wasn't a good idea because there was no real goverment which was no real laws leading to things like the Shays Revolution. It also relys to much on the independant states when they should have been united. Lastly the goverment didn't make any money to pay of the war.

Timothy w

2023-03-09 13:55:11 UTC

They were bad because they did not give congress power to do anything.
they could not tax "In reality, however, these powers were limited by the inability of Congress to impose taxes." They had no respect “No respect is paid to the federal [national] authority.” And they could not do anything fast "The Massachusetts government ended Shays' Rebellion in early 1787 by sending militia troops" the rebellion started the year before

Owen

2023-03-09 13:56:53 UTC

it was a bad idea because it relied on corporation for the sates. This did not happen because the sates don't likes taxes and there was no militarily or economy

other reasons
no leader
needs all sates to agree
is a week government

Liyana

2023-03-09 13:57:10 UTC

No, I do not think it was a good idea because there wasn't a real government. There was no law enforcement so people just did whatever because there was no one to stop them. they didn't get in trouble either. They didn't even have enough money either and they did not really have anything and they were kind of poor in other senses as well.

Nina

2023-03-09 13:58:54 UTC

The Articles of Confederation was not a good foundation for the government. It was not a good foundation because everyone would be able to do whatever they want because there were no enforced laws. They also didn't enforce taxes which meant people had the option to say no to taxes. Added on to that, each state had a different currency, which led to confusion.

Lucie

2023-03-09 13:59:10 UTC

I believe that the Articles of Confederation was a good foundation at the start, but it would not have lasted any longer than it did. First of all, it wasn't enforced rules, it was suggested rules. Second, taxes were not enforced, so we didn't make enough money, if any at all. Third, any money that was given was worth barely anything, and sometimes, nothing at all.

Morgan

Morganizer — 2023-03-09 14:00:21 UTC

I believe that the Articles of Confederation were a bad foundation for the United States Government. There was no law enforcement, which essentially makes laws pointless, as nothing will stop people from breaking them. The people were also being heavily taxed, despite most people living in poverty.

Nate

2023-03-09 14:00:42 UTC

needed a leader but was not a terrible idea on paper just didn't work out I think if we got a president it would have worked out better because there was no one to enforce stuff that why it didn't work

Isaiah

2023-03-09 14:01:02 UTC

The Articles of Confederation was not a good foundation.they were to focused on winning the war.reason i don't think they were good.

1.They didn't have any form of currency.

2.They didn't have any type of leader.

3. They also didn't force laws which started riots.

Omari

2023-03-09 14:01:16 UTC

I don't think it was a good idea because if there's no real government than you can do bad things and that not a smart idea, but yea, not good

Stella :D

2023-03-09 17:18:31 UTC

I don't think that the Articles of Confederation was a good foundation. I think this because there wasn't really a government to keep everything in control. Also, every state had different ideas and didn't have a way to compromise. As a result of this, people rebelled. If the Constitution didn't replace the Articles of Confederation, America would have fallen apart quickly.

sean

2023-03-09 17:20:28 UTC

I dont think it was a very good idea because they had no secure government, and they set it up that there was no reason for anyone to listen. Under those rules, many people could barely make a living, and money had little value. I dont think it was a very "firm leauge of freindship" and that it was about time they replaced it.

Shanjit

2023-03-09 17:21:15 UTC

The Articles of Confederation was not a stable foundation for the United States. After winning the war,the United states was a free country. Although, now they didn't know what to do now.

1. The currency the U.S. had then wasn't a good source of income and it wasn't stable.

2. The United States had no leader, so they had to no one to follow to our look up to.

3. Lastly, no laws were enforce giving people too much freedom, so they do anything they want. They could do lots of bad stuff, an yet get away.

Rian

2023-03-09 17:22:35 UTC

I don't think that the articles of confederation was a good foundation. I think this because you can't just ask someone for taxes. If you give people the choice to pay taxes almost everyone is going to say no. Also all the states won't unanimously agree on something. There is going to be at least one state that won't agree. The more states that come the harder it will be. The last thing is this type of way will lead to rebellion like Shays's rebellion. These are the reasons why I think the articles of confederation is bad.

Zachary

2023-03-09 17:23:25 UTC

The articles of confederation was not a good foundation for the United States government. The articles of confederation did not let the congress impose taxes, so there wasn't enough money to pay for all of the debts of the war. Also, the money Congress created was worthless so all thirteen colonies made different currencies. Finally this caused farmers to not have enough money to pay for taxes so they had to sell their farms, so there wasn't enough food for all of the people.

Jordan

2023-03-09 17:23:45 UTC

I do think the Articles of Confederation were a good idea. They were a good idea because they gave everyone freedom, gave people the choice to pay taxes, and slightly united the states. The only reason they didn't work is because nothing was enforced well and people didn't all use the same money.

Hanshini

2023-03-09 17:24:11 UTC

I think that the Articles of Confederation wasn't a good foundation. They were really focused and involved on winning the war.

1. They didn't force any laws which means that people could do anything they wanted and that would not result in anything good.
2. They had no leader which was a bad thing because they could fall apart at any time without a leader.
3. They had no currency and that wasn't a good thing.

Sampriti Shrikant

2023-03-09 17:24:37 UTC

i think the Articles of Confederation was a bad idea because

1- there weren't any laws enforced,

2- the goverment wasn't making any money because they were no taxes

3- the USA was an anarchy at the time which meant there was no leader that citizens can follow

Emmitt E.

2023-03-09 17:30:34 UTC

I think that the Articles of Confederation were a good try, but they wouldn't sustain a country. The reasoning behind the Articles was that one person didn't have all of the power ruling over the U.S.A. They tried to split the power between all of the states. Another reason why the Articles of Confederation were a good try, would be how most states had the choice to pay taxes. The U.S.A didn't want to force people to pay for taxes at first, since that would seem like a dictatorship. Finally, The Articles of Confederation were a good try because they tried to make a a friendship untied for the states to try and distribute power.

Jesse

2023-03-10 02:03:41 UTC

I think that the articles of Confederation weren't a good foundation because they were really focused and involved on winning the war and didn't have enough time to focus on anything else until after.

1. They didn't force any laws which meant that people could do anything they wanted.
2. They had no leader which meant that they could fall apart easily.
3. They had no currency because the Articles of Confederation didn't let the congress impose taxes, so there wasn't enough money to pay for the war debt they had.

Saleh

2023-03-10 13:33:24 UTC

I don't think the articles of Federation were a good idea because,
- They made the 13 colonies fear their rights because something similar happened with the Great Britain.
- Some people would rebel of this and since there were no laws of stopping crimes, they couldn't be stopped by the government.
- They didn't had any money and took currency from countries like France and were in Debt.

danny

2023-03-10 13:45:56 UTC

The Articles of confederation was not a good foundation. every country need a strong central government. this is why the Articles of confederation failed.One of the responds why is there was no taxes for the goverment but they can declare war and have a army and navy but they have no money to get weapons and suplies. Under the Articles of confederation every state can print money but it was worthliss.