Technically yes, America was a land of opportunity for indentured servants, since many of them had slightly better conditions after arriving in America than they had back home, but this is of course relative.
The Democrats fought almost bitterly at times over a number of issues. the democrats fought bitterly over issues like slavery, tariff rates and banking policies. The democrats also fought over the issue of passing legislation for the creation of a number of jobs in the country. Hope this answer helps you.
If you're talking about WW2, it's the battle of Stalingrad.
If it's about WW1, it would probably be Verdun.
During the Great Depression in America, unemployment grew at a remarkable rate. At one point during this era, roughly 25% of Americans were unemployed.
When this many people are unemployed, there are several other problems tha arise. If people are unemployed, they don't have the ability to pay their bills (rent, mortgage, heat, etc.). Along with this, people who are unemployed do not have the means to buy food. This is where the breadlines come in.
These breadlines represent how Americans relied on assistance for organizations/government in order to survive during this era. This helped to ensure that Americans who were unemployed still had the means to live. However, this addresses only one small part of unemployment.
Andrew Jackson started the "Bank War" over the rechartering of the Second Bank of the United States. Proponents of the bank said that it encouraged westward expansion, expanded international commerce using credit, and helped reduce the government's debt. Jackson, on the other hand, was heavily against the BUS, calling it a danger to the liberties of the people. A champion for the rights of the common man, he advocated to protect the farmers and laborers. He claimed that the bank was owned by a small group of upperclass men, who only became richer by pocketing the money paid by the poorer common man for loans.
Jackson argued against the constitutionality of the BUS that was upheld about fourteen years before, during the 1819 McCulloch v. Maryland case. One of the points of the unanimous decision in that case stated that Congress had the power to establish the bank. Jackson, however, said that McCulloch v. Maryland could not prevent him from declaring a presidential veto on the bank if he believed it unconstitutional. He said that the decision in that 1819 case “ought not to control the coordinate authorities of this Government. The Congress, the Executive, and the Court must each for itself be guided by its own opinion of the Constitution," meaning that the 1819 decision could not control his interpretation of the Constitution or prevent him from doing what he thought was right. This point of view earned him the nickname "King Andrew I" from his critics, who saw his use of the veto and his attempted intrusion on congressional power as power-hungry behavior. In the end, Jackson was successful in challenging the bank, as its charter expired in 1836. He had successfully killed the "monster" that was the Bank of the United States.
