Was Mercantilism Beneficial

545 Words2 Pages

Mercantilism is an economic theory where one country’s power is determined through the wealth of its supplies. The colony’s existence is through the benefit of the mother country. In return, the colonies were expected to contribute to wealth, prosperity, and self-sufficiency. The settlers were treated as farmers, where they were expected to produce tobacco and other necessities of England, and not to interfere with anything that did not belong to them. Overall, mercantilism was not beneficial, as the British were the only ones to profit from this concept. One reason why mercantilism was not beneficial is that it was mostly for economic reasons that benefited the British, and no other colony. For example, the British were the ones who controlled aspect of the people’s lives, when it came to commerce. For example, the British enforced restrictions on how one’s colonies could spend their money, on what goods they were able to produce, on …show more content…

For example, the Navigation Laws that were signed between 1651 and 1673 prevented countries from trading with the Americans. It limited the people’s abilities to buy goods from other places. Through the Navigation Acts, colonies were only allowed to buy goods from the British, and were only allowed to sell their goods to the British. However, the colonies were to import any non-English goods through the English ports, and also pay a sum for these imports. These acts also prohibited the colonies from making any goods that have already been produced by the English. Also, the settlers were not allowed to manufacture at home at their own time, like make woolen cloth and beaver hats. The Americans also didn’t have a specific currency where even though they were constantly purchasing from the British, they were expected to use gold and silver. Soon supplies were depleted as a form of paper money was to be printed, even though it was eventually

Open Document