Final answer:
US businessmen viewed Latin America as an area for economic exploitation through neo-imperialism, where US investment was seen as a means to create stability and prosperity but often resulted in further economic dependency on foreign powers and failed to promote local job growth.
Step-by-step explanation:
During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, US businessmen began to view Latin America as a region ripe for economic exploitation and expansion. These views were influenced by the concept of neo-imperialism, where Latin American nations, though politically independent, were economically dominated by European and US investors. This resulted in a pattern of investment where US corporations and investors would exert great influence over the economies of Latin American countries, seeing them primarily as sources of raw materials and as markets for their finished goods. The strategy of Dollar Diplomacy, as endorsed by President Taft, encouraged American investment in Latin America with the belief that it would lead to stability and prosperity. Yet in many cases, it entrenched economic dependency and failed to stimulate significant job growth, often benefiting the investors over the local economies.
The disparity in economic power and influence stemmed from a variety of historical factors. Following independence from Spain and Portugal, Latin American economies struggled to establish stability, with many countries relying on export commodities whose prices were dictated by international markets. The region's economic vulnerability was exacerbated by regional wars, heavy debts to European banks, and the influx of cheaper European and US-manufactured goods which outcompeted local industries. Neo-imperialism in Latin America was characterized by its economic control by foreign powers, leaving little money for domestic development and causing an increase in the class divide within Latin American societies.