As Thomas DiLorenzo points out, mainstream history books often vilify the entrepreneurial class that emerged in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century's. Once considered "captains of industry", more recent generations know them only as "robber barons". This pejorative conception of entrepreneurs transcends historical bounds, having been resurrected in our own age of economic uncertainty.

What argument does DiLorenzo make to contest this interpretation of history? What evidence does he employ? How might this article instruct future historians who will one day recall the economic "collapse" of 2008? What is your final analysis regarding government subsidies for industry?