A History Mystery: Roosevelt- Why Lie?

[rightwinger]

A lie that has no bearing on the question: why did FDR lie....like this:

A major lie!

7. If one studies at the feet of Liberal professors and historians.....one imbibes lies. Total, absymal, outrageous lies.

I'll prove it now: According to Liberal star,Arthur Schlesinger, and to the others, the evil industrialists of the 1920s kept pay low and prices high, so that workers didn't have the money to buy the products they were making.

Like this:
a. "Managements disposition [in the 1920s]to maintain prices...meant that workers and farmers weredenied thebenefits ofincreasesin there own productivity. The consequences was the relativedecline of mass purchasing power."
Arthur Schlesinger, "The Crisis of the Old Order."Understanding Bushonomics | Center for American Progress


Got that?


6. Here is that same lie from demagogue Roosevelt, himself:

"Now it is worth remembering, and the cold figures of finance prove it, thatduring that time there was little or no drop in the prices that the consumer had to pay, although those same figures proved that the cost of production fell very greatly; corporate profit resulting from this period was enormous; at the same time little of that profit was devoted to the reduction of prices. The consumer was forgotten.Very little of it went into increased wages; the worker was forgotten, and by no means an adequate proportion was even paid out in dividends--the stockholder was forgotten." Roosevelt's Nomination Address, Chicago, Ill., July 2, 1932



The truth was very much the opposite.

"Hoover: ...keepingwages artificially higheven though bothprofits and prices were falling.Consumer prices plunged almost 25 percent between 1929 and 1933 while nominal wages on average decreased only 15 percent — translating into a substantial increase in wages in real terms,a major component of the cost of doing business. "Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed


As economist Richard Ebeling notes, “The‘high-wage’ policy of the Hooveradministration and the trade unions ... succeeded only in pricing workers out of the labor market, generating an increasing circle of unemployment.” Richard M. Ebeling, “Monetary Central Planning and the State, Part XI: The Great Depression and the Crisis of Government Intervention,” Freedom Daily (Fairfax, Virginia: The Future of Freedom Foundation, November 1997), p. 15.



No wonder the indoctrinees consider Roosevelt 'the greatest!" More lies than one can shake a stick at.

Roosevelt lied, and Liberals swear to it.

There was no lie being told. You are attributing subjective speculations and opinions to claim a lie is being told. You can not use all of that analytical opinion leading up to a speculative conclusion to prove a lie. It can only be used as a reason for disagreement.
Distortions and omissions invalidate a thesis. Hence, your thesis fails. That means your college professors would have rejected it. It is nothing more than conspiracy trash.

I just proved that there were no distortions.....and you buried your foot in your mouth.

No, you didn't and you saying you did is the biggest lie. You are voicing opinions and demanding that they are facts.

Do your really expect PC any better?

A Columbia degree in Cut and Paste will do that to you

When it comes to a discussion of education, you fit in like a Pork BBQ pit in Mecca.


And if you don't watch your step...I'm gonna play our fight song again.

Just for you PC

You can cut and paste your name right where it says "Student Name"

 

[rightwinger]

Really?


Is that what he did?


Economist Jim Powell, in “FDR’s Folly,” notes that a disproportionate amount of FDR’s relief and public works spending “went not to the poorest states such as the South, but to western states were people were better off , apparently because there were ‘swing’ states which could yield FDR more votes in the next election.”


Two things about you:
You believe every bit of Leftist propaganda
and...You are never right.

See TVA

 

[Camp]

Notice PC continues the routine of ignoring an important factor in the Great Depression that rational people know is an inescapable factor. Draught and repeated Dust Bowl Storms annihilated the agriculture industries in vast regions of the country and put millions on the roads searching for employment.

A lie that has no bearing on the question: why did FDR lie....like this:

A major lie!

7. If one studies at the feet of Liberal professors and historians.....one imbibes lies. Total, absymal, outrageous lies.

I'll prove it now: According to Liberal star,Arthur Schlesinger, and to the others, the evil industrialists of the 1920s kept pay low and prices high, so that workers didn't have the money to buy the products they were making.

Like this:
a. "Managements disposition [in the 1920s]to maintain prices...meant that workers and farmers weredenied thebenefits ofincreasesin there own productivity. The consequences was the relativedecline of mass purchasing power."
Arthur Schlesinger, "The Crisis of the Old Order."Understanding Bushonomics | Center for American Progress


Got that?


6. Here is that same lie from demagogue Roosevelt, himself:

"Now it is worth remembering, and the cold figures of finance prove it, thatduring that time there was little or no drop in the prices that the consumer had to pay, although those same figures proved that the cost of production fell very greatly; corporate profit resulting from this period was enormous; at the same time little of that profit was devoted to the reduction of prices. The consumer was forgotten.Very little of it went into increased wages; the worker was forgotten, and by no means an adequate proportion was even paid out in dividends--the stockholder was forgotten." Roosevelt's Nomination Address, Chicago, Ill., July 2, 1932



The truth was very much the opposite.

"Hoover: ...keepingwages artificially higheven though bothprofits and prices were falling.Consumer prices plunged almost 25 percent between 1929 and 1933 while nominal wages on average decreased only 15 percent — translating into a substantial increase in wages in real terms,a major component of the cost of doing business. "Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed


As economist Richard Ebeling notes, “The‘high-wage’ policy of the Hooveradministration and the trade unions ... succeeded only in pricing workers out of the labor market, generating an increasing circle of unemployment.” Richard M. Ebeling, “Monetary Central Planning and the State, Part XI: The Great Depression and the Crisis of Government Intervention,” Freedom Daily (Fairfax, Virginia: The Future of Freedom Foundation, November 1997), p. 15.



No wonder the indoctrinees consider Roosevelt 'the greatest!" More lies than one can shake a stick at.

Roosevelt lied, and Liberals swear to it.

There was no lie being told. You are attributing subjective speculations and opinions to claim a lie is being told. You can not use all of that analytical opinion leading up to a speculative conclusion to prove a lie. It can only be used as a reason for disagreement.
Distortions and omissions invalidate a thesis. Hence, your thesis fails. That means your college professors would have rejected it. It is nothing more than conspiracy trash.

I just proved that there were no distortions.....and you buried your foot in your mouth.

No, you didn't and you saying you did is the biggest lie. You are voicing opinions and demanding that they are facts.

I quoted Schlesinger and Roosevelt...and proved them both liars.
Like you.....liars.

Again?
Sure....
I'll prove it now: According to Liberal star,Arthur Schlesinger, and to the others, the evil industrialists of the 1920s kept pay low and prices high, so that workers didn't have the money to buy the products they were making.

Like this:
a. "Managements disposition [in the 1920s]to maintain prices...meant that workers and farmers were denied thebenefits ofincreasesin there own productivity. The consequences was the relativedecline of mass purchasing power."
Arthur Schlesinger, "The Crisis of the Old Order."Understanding Bushonomics | Center for American Progress


Got that?


6. Here is that same lie from demagogue Roosevelt, himself:

"Now it is worth remembering, and the cold figures of finance prove it, thatduring that time there was little or no drop in the prices that the consumer had to pay, although those same figures proved that the cost of production fell very greatly; corporate profit resulting from this period was enormous; at the same time little of that profit was devoted to the reduction of prices. The consumer was forgotten.Very little of it went into increased wages; the worker was forgotten, and by no means an adequate proportion was even paid out in dividends--the stockholder was forgotten." Roosevelt's Nomination Address, Chicago, Ill., July 2, 1932



The truth was very much the opposite.

"Hoover: ...keeping wages artificially higheven though bothprofits and prices were falling.Consumer prices plunged almost 25 percent between 1929 and 1933 while nominal wages on average decreased only 15 percent — translating into a substantial increase in wages in real terms,a major component of the cost of doing business. "Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed


As economist Richard Ebeling notes, “The‘high-wage’ policy of the Hooveradministration and the trade unions ... succeeded only in pricing workers out of the labor market, generating an increasing circle of unemployment.” Richard M. Ebeling, “Monetary Central Planning and the State, Part XI: The Great Depression and the Crisis of Government Intervention,” Freedom Daily (Fairfax, Virginia: The Future of Freedom Foundation, November 1997), p. 15.

Why are you now lecturing about the period that led up to the depression which was long before the FDR era. Are you blaming FDR for the economy and depressions of the '20's? You know the Great Depression began in 1929, four years before FDR came into office, don't you?

 

[PoliticalChic]

There was no lie being told. You are attributing subjective speculations and opinions to claim a lie is being told. You can not use all of that analytical opinion leading up to a speculative conclusion to prove a lie. It can only be used as a reason for disagreement.
Distortions and omissions invalidate a thesis. Hence, your thesis fails. That means your college professors would have rejected it. It is nothing more than conspiracy trash.

I just proved that there were no distortions.....and you buried your foot in your mouth.

No, you didn't and you saying you did is the biggest lie. You are voicing opinions and demanding that they are facts.

Do your really expect PC any better?

A Columbia degree in Cut and Paste will do that to you

When it comes to a discussion of education, you fit in like a Pork BBQ pit in Mecca.


And if you don't watch your step...I'm gonna play our fight song again.

Just for you PC

You can cut and paste your name right where it says "Student Name"

 

[PoliticalChic]

A lie that has no bearing on the question: why did FDR lie....like this:

A major lie!

7. If one studies at the feet of Liberal professors and historians.....one imbibes lies. Total, absymal, outrageous lies.

I'll prove it now: According to Liberal star,Arthur Schlesinger, and to the others, the evil industrialists of the 1920s kept pay low and prices high, so that workers didn't have the money to buy the products they were making.

Like this:
a. "Managements disposition [in the 1920s]to maintain prices...meant that workers and farmers weredenied thebenefits ofincreasesin there own productivity. The consequences was the relativedecline of mass purchasing power."
Arthur Schlesinger, "The Crisis of the Old Order."Understanding Bushonomics | Center for American Progress


Got that?


6. Here is that same lie from demagogue Roosevelt, himself:

"Now it is worth remembering, and the cold figures of finance prove it, thatduring that time there was little or no drop in the prices that the consumer had to pay, although those same figures proved that the cost of production fell very greatly; corporate profit resulting from this period was enormous; at the same time little of that profit was devoted to the reduction of prices. The consumer was forgotten.Very little of it went into increased wages; the worker was forgotten, and by no means an adequate proportion was even paid out in dividends--the stockholder was forgotten." Roosevelt's Nomination Address, Chicago, Ill., July 2, 1932



The truth was very much the opposite.

"Hoover: ...keepingwages artificially higheven though bothprofits and prices were falling.Consumer prices plunged almost 25 percent between 1929 and 1933 while nominal wages on average decreased only 15 percent — translating into a substantial increase in wages in real terms,a major component of the cost of doing business. "Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed


As economist Richard Ebeling notes, “The‘high-wage’ policy of the Hooveradministration and the trade unions ... succeeded only in pricing workers out of the labor market, generating an increasing circle of unemployment.” Richard M. Ebeling, “Monetary Central Planning and the State, Part XI: The Great Depression and the Crisis of Government Intervention,” Freedom Daily (Fairfax, Virginia: The Future of Freedom Foundation, November 1997), p. 15.



No wonder the indoctrinees consider Roosevelt 'the greatest!" More lies than one can shake a stick at.

Roosevelt lied, and Liberals swear to it.

There was no lie being told. You are attributing subjective speculations and opinions to claim a lie is being told. You can not use all of that analytical opinion leading up to a speculative conclusion to prove a lie. It can only be used as a reason for disagreement.
Distortions and omissions invalidate a thesis. Hence, your thesis fails. That means your college professors would have rejected it. It is nothing more than conspiracy trash.

I just proved that there were no distortions.....and you buried your foot in your mouth.

No, you didn't and you saying you did is the biggest lie. You are voicing opinions and demanding that they are facts.

I quoted Schlesinger and Roosevelt...and proved them both liars.
Like you.....liars.

Again?
Sure....
I'll prove it now: According to Liberal star,Arthur Schlesinger, and to the others, the evil industrialists of the 1920s kept pay low and prices high, so that workers didn't have the money to buy the products they were making.

Like this:
a. "Managements disposition [in the 1920s]to maintain prices...meant that workers and farmers were denied thebenefits ofincreasesin there own productivity. The consequences was the relativedecline of mass purchasing power."
Arthur Schlesinger, "The Crisis of the Old Order."Understanding Bushonomics | Center for American Progress


Got that?


6. Here is that same lie from demagogue Roosevelt, himself:

"Now it is worth remembering, and the cold figures of finance prove it, thatduring that time there was little or no drop in the prices that the consumer had to pay, although those same figures proved that the cost of production fell very greatly; corporate profit resulting from this period was enormous; at the same time little of that profit was devoted to the reduction of prices. The consumer was forgotten.Very little of it went into increased wages; the worker was forgotten, and by no means an adequate proportion was even paid out in dividends--the stockholder was forgotten." Roosevelt's Nomination Address, Chicago, Ill., July 2, 1932



The truth was very much the opposite.

"Hoover: ...keeping wages artificially higheven though bothprofits and prices were falling.Consumer prices plunged almost 25 percent between 1929 and 1933 while nominal wages on average decreased only 15 percent — translating into a substantial increase in wages in real terms,a major component of the cost of doing business. "Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed


As economist Richard Ebeling notes, “The‘high-wage’ policy of the Hooveradministration and the trade unions ... succeeded only in pricing workers out of the labor market, generating an increasing circle of unemployment.” Richard M. Ebeling, “Monetary Central Planning and the State, Part XI: The Great Depression and the Crisis of Government Intervention,” Freedom Daily (Fairfax, Virginia: The Future of Freedom Foundation, November 1997), p. 15.

Why are you now lecturing about the period that led up to the depression which was long before the FDR era. Are you blaming FDR for the economy and depressions of the '20's? You know the Great Depression began in 1929, four years before FDR came into office, don't you?

The posts prove the title of the thread.....Roosevelt was a liar.

Proving you the same, just a bonus.

 

[Camp]

Another of PC's obsessive FDR threads.

He sure does hate that FDR led America out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2

FDR entire first 2 terms had average UE of 20%, thats some leadership

No, it didn't and the methods of calculating unemployment have been provided to you on numerous occasions. You are just lying.

How's this method of calculating unemployment?

.... imagine a triple line of the unemployed, three across, consisting of those unemployed under Hoover, in 1931. The line would have gonefrom Los Angeles, across the country, to the border of Maine.

What effect did Roosevelt have on the line?

Well, eight years later, in 1939, the length of the line would have gone further, from the Maine border, south to Boston, then on to New York City, then to Philadelphia, on to Washington, D.C.- and finally, into Virginia.
Folsom, "New Deal or Raw Deal"


Think Folsom was wrong?

Check it out at the US Bureau of the Census, 'Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970, I-126 andUnemployment Statistics during the Great Depression

Yes, Folsom was misleading and the reason has been provided to you on numerous occasions when you have tried to use that misleading example. Your misleading statement and Folsom is dependent on a method of calculating unemployment called the Lebbergott method used to calculate how many were not employed in private industry that ignores millions employed in the programs that built infrastructure in the New Deal Programs, including the upgrading of military infrastructure in preparations for the coming war that FDR had the vision to know was coming.

 

[Unkotare]

Folks lie to get something they want, or to hide some damaging truth. In the following thread, Roosevelt's momentous lie about fixing the economy is revealed.....

...and the question posed is....what did he have to gain?



Folks were truly frightened by the Hoover Recession....and had faith in the promises of Franklin Roosevelt, that he knew exactly what caused the economic downturn...and knew the steps necessary to cure same.

And, he did know: After all, It had been done earlier by Harding, and he, Harding, cured a similar recession/depression in the time most American economic calamities required: a year or two.


So.....if he knew what had to be done....and promised to do exactly that.....

...why did Franklin Roosevelt lie to the public, and- not just ignore the cures...but institute policies that extended the Depression a full decade?????

Why?



1. "Though modern myth claims that the free market “self destructed” in 1929, government policy was the debacle’s principal culprit. If this crash had been like previous ones, the hard times would have ended in two or three years at the most, and likely sooner than that.
But unprecedented political bungling instead prolonged the misery for over 10 years.

Unemployment in 1930 averaged a mildly recessionary 8.9 percent, up from 3.2 percent in 1929. It shot up rapidly until peaking out at more than 25 percent in 1933.


2. Did Hoover really subscribe to a “hands-off-the-economy,” free-market philosophy? His opponent in the 1932 election, Franklin Roosevelt, didn’t think so. During the campaign, a) Roosevelt blasted Hoover for spending and taxing too much,
b) boosting the national debt,
c) choking off trade, and
d)putting millions on the dole.
e) [Roosevelt accused Hoover] of “reckless and extravagant” spending,
f) of thinking “that we ought to center control of everything in Washington as rapidly as possible,” and g) of presiding over “the greatest spending administration in peacetime in all of history.”

Contrary to the conventional view about Hoover, Roosevelt and Garner were absolutely right." Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed



a. Roosevelt’s running mate, John Nance Garner, charged that Hoover was “leading the country down the path of socialism.”
“FDR’s Disputed Legacy,” Time, February 1, 1982, p. 23




Now....look over that list of charges by Roosevelt at Hoover, economic policy mistakes....and, since he was correct in those accusations......... why the heck would Roosevelt continue with every single one of 'em????


Roosevelt: Why lie????

Prosperity is just around the corner

Republicans lied about it FDR made it happen

Aren't they missing you back in Bizarro World?

 

[Camp]

There was no lie being told. You are attributing subjective speculations and opinions to claim a lie is being told. You can not use all of that analytical opinion leading up to a speculative conclusion to prove a lie. It can only be used as a reason for disagreement.
Distortions and omissions invalidate a thesis. Hence, your thesis fails. That means your college professors would have rejected it. It is nothing more than conspiracy trash.

I just proved that there were no distortions.....and you buried your foot in your mouth.

No, you didn't and you saying you did is the biggest lie. You are voicing opinions and demanding that they are facts.

I quoted Schlesinger and Roosevelt...and proved them both liars.
Like you.....liars.

Again?
Sure....
I'll prove it now: According to Liberal star,Arthur Schlesinger, and to the others, the evil industrialists of the 1920s kept pay low and prices high, so that workers didn't have the money to buy the products they were making.

Like this:
a. "Managements disposition [in the 1920s]to maintain prices...meant that workers and farmers were denied thebenefits ofincreasesin there own productivity. The consequences was the relativedecline of mass purchasing power."
Arthur Schlesinger, "The Crisis of the Old Order."Understanding Bushonomics | Center for American Progress


Got that?


6. Here is that same lie from demagogue Roosevelt, himself:

"Now it is worth remembering, and the cold figures of finance prove it, thatduring that time there was little or no drop in the prices that the consumer had to pay, although those same figures proved that the cost of production fell very greatly; corporate profit resulting from this period was enormous; at the same time little of that profit was devoted to the reduction of prices. The consumer was forgotten.Very little of it went into increased wages; the worker was forgotten, and by no means an adequate proportion was even paid out in dividends--the stockholder was forgotten." Roosevelt's Nomination Address, Chicago, Ill., July 2, 1932



The truth was very much the opposite.

"Hoover: ...keeping wages artificially higheven though bothprofits and prices were falling.Consumer prices plunged almost 25 percent between 1929 and 1933 while nominal wages on average decreased only 15 percent — translating into a substantial increase in wages in real terms,a major component of the cost of doing business. "Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed


As economist Richard Ebeling notes, “The‘high-wage’ policy of the Hooveradministration and the trade unions ... succeeded only in pricing workers out of the labor market, generating an increasing circle of unemployment.” Richard M. Ebeling, “Monetary Central Planning and the State, Part XI: The Great Depression and the Crisis of Government Intervention,” Freedom Daily (Fairfax, Virginia: The Future of Freedom Foundation, November 1997), p. 15.

Why are you now lecturing about the period that led up to the depression which was long before the FDR era. Are you blaming FDR for the economy and depressions of the '20's? You know the Great Depression began in 1929, four years before FDR came into office, don't you?

The posts prove the title of the thread.....Roosevelt was a liar.

Proving you the same, just a bonus.

No, you are even distorting your thread title. It insinuates a mystery. There is no mystery about what you interpret as lies. You are pretending to have come up with some original idea for a thesis. All you are doing is parroting through your usual methods of disinformation. This crap happened 80 years ago and great scholars and historians have reviewed your kind of garbage and consistently judged it to be agenda driven nonsense. Even some of those you quote would judge you to be a radical who misuses their quotes.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Another of PC's obsessive FDR threads.

He sure does hate that FDR led America out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2

FDR entire first 2 terms had average UE of 20%, thats some leadership

No, it didn't and the methods of calculating unemployment have been provided to you on numerous occasions. You are just lying.

How's this method of calculating unemployment?

.... imagine a triple line of the unemployed, three across, consisting of those unemployed under Hoover, in 1931. The line would have gonefrom Los Angeles, across the country, to the border of Maine.

What effect did Roosevelt have on the line?

Well, eight years later, in 1939, the length of the line would have gone further, from the Maine border, south to Boston, then on to New York City, then to Philadelphia, on to Washington, D.C.- and finally, into Virginia.
Folsom, "New Deal or Raw Deal"


Think Folsom was wrong?

Check it out at the US Bureau of the Census, 'Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970, I-126 andUnemployment Statistics during the Great Depression

Yes, Folsom was misleading and the reason has been provided to you on numerous occasions when you have tried to use that misleading example. Your misleading statement and Folsom is dependent on a method of calculating unemployment called the Lebbergott method used to calculate how many were not employed in private industry that ignores millions employed in the programs that built infrastructure in the New Deal Programs, including the upgrading of military infrastructure in preparations for the coming war that FDR had the vision to know was coming.

Tap-dance as fast as you can.
Proven: Roosevelt was a failure,and you a liar.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I just proved that there were no distortions.....and you buried your foot in your mouth.

No, you didn't and you saying you did is the biggest lie. You are voicing opinions and demanding that they are facts.

I quoted Schlesinger and Roosevelt...and proved them both liars.
Like you.....liars.

Again?
Sure....
I'll prove it now: According to Liberal star,Arthur Schlesinger, and to the others, the evil industrialists of the 1920s kept pay low and prices high, so that workers didn't have the money to buy the products they were making.

Like this:
a. "Managements disposition [in the 1920s]to maintain prices...meant that workers and farmers were denied thebenefits ofincreasesin there own productivity. The consequences was the relativedecline of mass purchasing power."
Arthur Schlesinger, "The Crisis of the Old Order."Understanding Bushonomics | Center for American Progress


Got that?


6. Here is that same lie from demagogue Roosevelt, himself:

"Now it is worth remembering, and the cold figures of finance prove it, thatduring that time there was little or no drop in the prices that the consumer had to pay, although those same figures proved that the cost of production fell very greatly; corporate profit resulting from this period was enormous; at the same time little of that profit was devoted to the reduction of prices. The consumer was forgotten.Very little of it went into increased wages; the worker was forgotten, and by no means an adequate proportion was even paid out in dividends--the stockholder was forgotten." Roosevelt's Nomination Address, Chicago, Ill., July 2, 1932



The truth was very much the opposite.

"Hoover: ...keeping wages artificially higheven though bothprofits and prices were falling.Consumer prices plunged almost 25 percent between 1929 and 1933 while nominal wages on average decreased only 15 percent — translating into a substantial increase in wages in real terms,a major component of the cost of doing business. "Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed


As economist Richard Ebeling notes, “The‘high-wage’ policy of the Hooveradministration and the trade unions ... succeeded only in pricing workers out of the labor market, generating an increasing circle of unemployment.” Richard M. Ebeling, “Monetary Central Planning and the State, Part XI: The Great Depression and the Crisis of Government Intervention,” Freedom Daily (Fairfax, Virginia: The Future of Freedom Foundation, November 1997), p. 15.

Why are you now lecturing about the period that led up to the depression which was long before the FDR era. Are you blaming FDR for the economy and depressions of the '20's? You know the Great Depression began in 1929, four years before FDR came into office, don't you?

The posts prove the title of the thread.....Roosevelt was a liar.

Proving you the same, just a bonus.

No, you are even distorting your thread title. It insinuates a mystery. There is no mystery about what you interpret as lies. You are pretending to have come up with some original idea for a thesis. All you are doing is parroting through your usual methods of disinformation. This crap happened 80 years ago and great scholars and historians have reviewed your kind of garbage and consistently judged it to be agenda driven nonsense. Even some of those you quote would judge you to be a radical who misuses their quotes.

The mystery is posed is why Roosevelt lied to the American people.

Solved in post #10...soon.

 

[Camp]

Notice PC continues the routine of ignoring an important factor in the Great Depression that rational people know is an inescapable factor. Draught and repeated Dust Bowl Storms annihilated the agriculture industries in vast regions of the country and put millions on the roads searching for employment.

A lie that has no bearing on the question: why did FDR lie....like this:

A major lie!

7. If one studies at the feet of Liberal professors and historians.....one imbibes lies. Total, absymal, outrageous lies.

I'll prove it now: According to Liberal star,Arthur Schlesinger, and to the others, the evil industrialists of the 1920s kept pay low and prices high, so that workers didn't have the money to buy the products they were making.

Like this:
a. "Managements disposition [in the 1920s]to maintain prices...meant that workers and farmers weredenied thebenefits ofincreasesin there own productivity. The consequences was the relativedecline of mass purchasing power."
Arthur Schlesinger, "The Crisis of the Old Order."Understanding Bushonomics | Center for American Progress


Got that?


6. Here is that same lie from demagogue Roosevelt, himself:

"Now it is worth remembering, and the cold figures of finance prove it, thatduring that time there was little or no drop in the prices that the consumer had to pay, although those same figures proved that the cost of production fell very greatly; corporate profit resulting from this period was enormous; at the same time little of that profit was devoted to the reduction of prices. The consumer was forgotten.Very little of it went into increased wages; the worker was forgotten, and by no means an adequate proportion was even paid out in dividends--the stockholder was forgotten." Roosevelt's Nomination Address, Chicago, Ill., July 2, 1932



The truth was very much the opposite.

"Hoover: ...keepingwages artificially higheven though bothprofits and prices were falling.Consumer prices plunged almost 25 percent between 1929 and 1933 while nominal wages on average decreased only 15 percent — translating into a substantial increase in wages in real terms,a major component of the cost of doing business. "Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed


As economist Richard Ebeling notes, “The‘high-wage’ policy of the Hooveradministration and the trade unions ... succeeded only in pricing workers out of the labor market, generating an increasing circle of unemployment.” Richard M. Ebeling, “Monetary Central Planning and the State, Part XI: The Great Depression and the Crisis of Government Intervention,” Freedom Daily (Fairfax, Virginia: The Future of Freedom Foundation, November 1997), p. 15.



No wonder the indoctrinees consider Roosevelt 'the greatest!" More lies than one can shake a stick at.

Roosevelt lied, and Liberals swear to it.

There was no lie being told. You are attributing subjective speculations and opinions to claim a lie is being told. You can not use all of that analytical opinion leading up to a speculative conclusion to prove a lie. It can only be used as a reason for disagreement.
Distortions and omissions invalidate a thesis. Hence, your thesis fails. That means your college professors would have rejected it. It is nothing more than conspiracy trash.

I just proved that there were no distortions.....and you buried your foot in your mouth.

You were challenged on the method used to figure a primary fact of you thesis. The challenge is that you use an inappropriate method of unemployment calculation and that misuse distorts the points you are attempting to make. You do this all the time because it is necessary to distort in order to make your point. You use a method that calculates unemployment in the private sector, not unemployment as it applies to overall numbers in the population. Your method declares builders of the Golden Gate bridge, the Lincoln Tunnel, the Skyline Drive, thousand of schools, Navy facilities, Army Barracks, small airports, Post Offices, roads, etc. as being unemployed because they did not get their checks from private industry.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Notice PC continues the routine of ignoring an important factor in the Great Depression that rational people know is an inescapable factor. Draught and repeated Dust Bowl Storms annihilated the agriculture industries in vast regions of the country and put millions on the roads searching for employment.

A lie that has no bearing on the question: why did FDR lie....like this:

A major lie!

7. If one studies at the feet of Liberal professors and historians.....one imbibes lies. Total, absymal, outrageous lies.

I'll prove it now: According to Liberal star,Arthur Schlesinger, and to the others, the evil industrialists of the 1920s kept pay low and prices high, so that workers didn't have the money to buy the products they were making.

Like this:
a. "Managements disposition [in the 1920s]to maintain prices...meant that workers and farmers weredenied thebenefits ofincreasesin there own productivity. The consequences was the relativedecline of mass purchasing power."
Arthur Schlesinger, "The Crisis of the Old Order."Understanding Bushonomics | Center for American Progress


Got that?


6. Here is that same lie from demagogue Roosevelt, himself:

"Now it is worth remembering, and the cold figures of finance prove it, thatduring that time there was little or no drop in the prices that the consumer had to pay, although those same figures proved that the cost of production fell very greatly; corporate profit resulting from this period was enormous; at the same time little of that profit was devoted to the reduction of prices. The consumer was forgotten.Very little of it went into increased wages; the worker was forgotten, and by no means an adequate proportion was even paid out in dividends--the stockholder was forgotten." Roosevelt's Nomination Address, Chicago, Ill., July 2, 1932



The truth was very much the opposite.

"Hoover: ...keepingwages artificially higheven though bothprofits and prices were falling.Consumer prices plunged almost 25 percent between 1929 and 1933 while nominal wages on average decreased only 15 percent — translating into a substantial increase in wages in real terms,a major component of the cost of doing business. "Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed


As economist Richard Ebeling notes, “The‘high-wage’ policy of the Hooveradministration and the trade unions ... succeeded only in pricing workers out of the labor market, generating an increasing circle of unemployment.” Richard M. Ebeling, “Monetary Central Planning and the State, Part XI: The Great Depression and the Crisis of Government Intervention,” Freedom Daily (Fairfax, Virginia: The Future of Freedom Foundation, November 1997), p. 15.



No wonder the indoctrinees consider Roosevelt 'the greatest!" More lies than one can shake a stick at.

Roosevelt lied, and Liberals swear to it.

There was no lie being told. You are attributing subjective speculations and opinions to claim a lie is being told. You can not use all of that analytical opinion leading up to a speculative conclusion to prove a lie. It can only be used as a reason for disagreement.
Distortions and omissions invalidate a thesis. Hence, your thesis fails. That means your college professors would have rejected it. It is nothing more than conspiracy trash.

I just proved that there were no distortions.....and you buried your foot in your mouth.

You were challenged on the method used to figure a primary fact of you thesis. The challenge is that you use an inappropriate method of unemployment calculation and that misuse distorts the points you are attempting to make. You do this all the time because it is necessary to distort in order to make your point. You use a method that calculates unemployment in the private sector, not unemployment as it applies to overall numbers in the population. Your method declares builders of the Golden Gate bridge, the Lincoln Tunnel, the Skyline Drive, thousand of schools, Navy facilities, Army Barracks, small airports, Post Offices, roads, etc. as being unemployed because they did not get their checks from private industry.

You've been challenged numerous times to tell the truth.

Why haven't you?

 

[PoliticalChic]

9. Roosevelt had so quickly and thoroughly abandoned the platform on which he was elected, the promises he made to the American people, that Director of the Bureau of the Budget, Lewis W. Douglas resigned after only one year on the job.

At Harvard University in May 1935, Douglas made it plain that America was facing a momentous choice:

'Will we choose to subject ourselves — this great country — to the despotism of bureaucracy, controlling our every act, destroying what equality we have attained, reducing us eventually to the condition of impoverished slaves of the state? Or will we cling to the liberties for which man has struggled for more than a thousand years? It is important to understand the magnitude of the issue before us ...


If we do not elect to have a tyrannical, oppressive bureaucracy controlling our lives, destroying progress, depressing the standard of living ... then should it not be the function of the Federal government under a democracy to limit its activities to those which a democracy may adequately deal, such for example as national defense, maintaining law and order, protecting life and property, preventing dishonesty, and ... guarding the public against ... vested special interests?'
From The Liberal Tradition: A Free People and a Free Economy by Lewis W. Douglas, as quoted in “Monetary Central Planning and the State, Part XIV: The New Deal and Its Critics,” by Richard M. Ebeling in Freedom Daily, February 1998, p. 12.



What a great definition of Liberalism: "... the despotism of bureaucracy, controlling our every act, ..."

Can I get an "amen"?

 

[Camp]

Another of PC's obsessive FDR threads.

He sure does hate that FDR led America out of the Depression and to victory in World War 2

FDR entire first 2 terms had average UE of 20%, thats some leadership

No, it didn't and the methods of calculating unemployment have been provided to you on numerous occasions. You are just lying.

How's this method of calculating unemployment?

.... imagine a triple line of the unemployed, three across, consisting of those unemployed under Hoover, in 1931. The line would have gonefrom Los Angeles, across the country, to the border of Maine.

What effect did Roosevelt have on the line?

Well, eight years later, in 1939, the length of the line would have gone further, from the Maine border, south to Boston, then on to New York City, then to Philadelphia, on to Washington, D.C.- and finally, into Virginia.
Folsom, "New Deal or Raw Deal"


Think Folsom was wrong?

Check it out at the US Bureau of the Census, 'Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970, I-126 andUnemployment Statistics during the Great Depression

Yes, Folsom was misleading and the reason has been provided to you on numerous occasions when you have tried to use that misleading example. Your misleading statement and Folsom is dependent on a method of calculating unemployment called the Lebbergott method used to calculate how many were not employed in private industry that ignores millions employed in the programs that built infrastructure in the New Deal Programs, including the upgrading of military infrastructure in preparations for the coming war that FDR had the vision to know was coming.

Tap-dance as fast as you can.
Proven: Roosevelt was a failure,and you a liar.

Bringing up the methods used for calculating unemployment during the Great Depression is not tap dancing. You don't have an understanding and knowledge of a basic subject needed to make an educated discussion about unemployment during the period.

 

[PoliticalChic]

FDR entire first 2 terms had average UE of 20%, thats some leadership

No, it didn't and the methods of calculating unemployment have been provided to you on numerous occasions. You are just lying.

How's this method of calculating unemployment?

.... imagine a triple line of the unemployed, three across, consisting of those unemployed under Hoover, in 1931. The line would have gonefrom Los Angeles, across the country, to the border of Maine.

What effect did Roosevelt have on the line?

Well, eight years later, in 1939, the length of the line would have gone further, from the Maine border, south to Boston, then on to New York City, then to Philadelphia, on to Washington, D.C.- and finally, into Virginia.
Folsom, "New Deal or Raw Deal"


Think Folsom was wrong?

Check it out at the US Bureau of the Census, 'Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970, I-126 andUnemployment Statistics during the Great Depression

Yes, Folsom was misleading and the reason has been provided to you on numerous occasions when you have tried to use that misleading example. Your misleading statement and Folsom is dependent on a method of calculating unemployment called the Lebbergott method used to calculate how many were not employed in private industry that ignores millions employed in the programs that built infrastructure in the New Deal Programs, including the upgrading of military infrastructure in preparations for the coming war that FDR had the vision to know was coming.

Tap-dance as fast as you can.
Proven: Roosevelt was a failure,and you a liar.

Bringing up the methods used for calculating unemployment during the Great Depression is not tap dancing. You don't have an understanding and knowledge of a basic subject needed to make an educated discussion about unemployment during the period.

Was Franklin Roosevelt a congenital liar?

Did he point out the policies of Hoover that led to the economic collapse.....and promise to reverse those policies?

Did Roosevelt simply continue and even enlarge those same policies?

Answer now.

 

[Camp]

Notice PC continues the routine of ignoring an important factor in the Great Depression that rational people know is an inescapable factor. Draught and repeated Dust Bowl Storms annihilated the agriculture industries in vast regions of the country and put millions on the roads searching for employment.

A lie that has no bearing on the question: why did FDR lie....like this:

A major lie!

7. If one studies at the feet of Liberal professors and historians.....one imbibes lies. Total, absymal, outrageous lies.

I'll prove it now: According to Liberal star,Arthur Schlesinger, and to the others, the evil industrialists of the 1920s kept pay low and prices high, so that workers didn't have the money to buy the products they were making.

Like this:
a. "Managements disposition [in the 1920s]to maintain prices...meant that workers and farmers weredenied thebenefits ofincreasesin there own productivity. The consequences was the relativedecline of mass purchasing power."
Arthur Schlesinger, "The Crisis of the Old Order."Understanding Bushonomics | Center for American Progress


Got that?


6. Here is that same lie from demagogue Roosevelt, himself:

"Now it is worth remembering, and the cold figures of finance prove it, thatduring that time there was little or no drop in the prices that the consumer had to pay, although those same figures proved that the cost of production fell very greatly; corporate profit resulting from this period was enormous; at the same time little of that profit was devoted to the reduction of prices. The consumer was forgotten.Very little of it went into increased wages; the worker was forgotten, and by no means an adequate proportion was even paid out in dividends--the stockholder was forgotten." Roosevelt's Nomination Address, Chicago, Ill., July 2, 1932



The truth was very much the opposite.

"Hoover: ...keepingwages artificially higheven though bothprofits and prices were falling.Consumer prices plunged almost 25 percent between 1929 and 1933 while nominal wages on average decreased only 15 percent — translating into a substantial increase in wages in real terms,a major component of the cost of doing business. "Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed


As economist Richard Ebeling notes, “The‘high-wage’ policy of the Hooveradministration and the trade unions ... succeeded only in pricing workers out of the labor market, generating an increasing circle of unemployment.” Richard M. Ebeling, “Monetary Central Planning and the State, Part XI: The Great Depression and the Crisis of Government Intervention,” Freedom Daily (Fairfax, Virginia: The Future of Freedom Foundation, November 1997), p. 15.



No wonder the indoctrinees consider Roosevelt 'the greatest!" More lies than one can shake a stick at.

Roosevelt lied, and Liberals swear to it.

There was no lie being told. You are attributing subjective speculations and opinions to claim a lie is being told. You can not use all of that analytical opinion leading up to a speculative conclusion to prove a lie. It can only be used as a reason for disagreement.
Distortions and omissions invalidate a thesis. Hence, your thesis fails. That means your college professors would have rejected it. It is nothing more than conspiracy trash.

I just proved that there were no distortions.....and you buried your foot in your mouth.

You were challenged on the method used to figure a primary fact of you thesis. The challenge is that you use an inappropriate method of unemployment calculation and that misuse distorts the points you are attempting to make. You do this all the time because it is necessary to distort in order to make your point. You use a method that calculates unemployment in the private sector, not unemployment as it applies to overall numbers in the population. Your method declares builders of the Golden Gate bridge, the Lincoln Tunnel, the Skyline Drive, thousand of schools, Navy facilities, Army Barracks, small airports, Post Offices, roads, etc. as being unemployed because they did not get their checks from private industry.

You've been challenged numerous times to tell the truth.

Why haven't you?

You are evading answering the challenge you have been given about the method of determining unemployment that you are using to promote your concept. You asked for an example of how you were being dishonest. I gave you one. Your response is to evade the challenge and ask a different question.

 

[Camp]

No, it didn't and the methods of calculating unemployment have been provided to you on numerous occasions. You are just lying.

How's this method of calculating unemployment?

.... imagine a triple line of the unemployed, three across, consisting of those unemployed under Hoover, in 1931. The line would have gonefrom Los Angeles, across the country, to the border of Maine.

What effect did Roosevelt have on the line?

Well, eight years later, in 1939, the length of the line would have gone further, from the Maine border, south to Boston, then on to New York City, then to Philadelphia, on to Washington, D.C.- and finally, into Virginia.
Folsom, "New Deal or Raw Deal"


Think Folsom was wrong?

Check it out at the US Bureau of the Census, 'Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970, I-126 andUnemployment Statistics during the Great Depression

Yes, Folsom was misleading and the reason has been provided to you on numerous occasions when you have tried to use that misleading example. Your misleading statement and Folsom is dependent on a method of calculating unemployment called the Lebbergott method used to calculate how many were not employed in private industry that ignores millions employed in the programs that built infrastructure in the New Deal Programs, including the upgrading of military infrastructure in preparations for the coming war that FDR had the vision to know was coming.

Tap-dance as fast as you can.
Proven: Roosevelt was a failure,and you a liar.

Bringing up the methods used for calculating unemployment during the Great Depression is not tap dancing. You don't have an understanding and knowledge of a basic subject needed to make an educated discussion about unemployment during the period.

Was Franklin Roosevelt a congenital liar?

Did he point out the policies of Hoover that led to the economic collapse.....and promise to reverse those policies?

Did Roosevelt simply continue and even enlarge those same policies?

Answer now.

He made substantial changes, most importantly, the method of financing public projects. He provided loans in massive quantities to individual states based on the collateral of the so-called "confiscated gold" for public projects. The states paid back every dime.

 

[PoliticalChic]

A lie that has no bearing on the question: why did FDR lie....like this:

A major lie!

7. If one studies at the feet of Liberal professors and historians.....one imbibes lies. Total, absymal, outrageous lies.

I'll prove it now: According to Liberal star,Arthur Schlesinger, and to the others, the evil industrialists of the 1920s kept pay low and prices high, so that workers didn't have the money to buy the products they were making.

Like this:
a. "Managements disposition [in the 1920s]to maintain prices...meant that workers and farmers weredenied thebenefits ofincreasesin there own productivity. The consequences was the relativedecline of mass purchasing power."
Arthur Schlesinger, "The Crisis of the Old Order."Understanding Bushonomics | Center for American Progress


Got that?


6. Here is that same lie from demagogue Roosevelt, himself:

"Now it is worth remembering, and the cold figures of finance prove it, thatduring that time there was little or no drop in the prices that the consumer had to pay, although those same figures proved that the cost of production fell very greatly; corporate profit resulting from this period was enormous; at the same time little of that profit was devoted to the reduction of prices. The consumer was forgotten.Very little of it went into increased wages; the worker was forgotten, and by no means an adequate proportion was even paid out in dividends--the stockholder was forgotten." Roosevelt's Nomination Address, Chicago, Ill., July 2, 1932



The truth was very much the opposite.

"Hoover: ...keepingwages artificially higheven though bothprofits and prices were falling.Consumer prices plunged almost 25 percent between 1929 and 1933 while nominal wages on average decreased only 15 percent — translating into a substantial increase in wages in real terms,a major component of the cost of doing business. "Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed


As economist Richard Ebeling notes, “The‘high-wage’ policy of the Hooveradministration and the trade unions ... succeeded only in pricing workers out of the labor market, generating an increasing circle of unemployment.” Richard M. Ebeling, “Monetary Central Planning and the State, Part XI: The Great Depression and the Crisis of Government Intervention,” Freedom Daily (Fairfax, Virginia: The Future of Freedom Foundation, November 1997), p. 15.



No wonder the indoctrinees consider Roosevelt 'the greatest!" More lies than one can shake a stick at.

Roosevelt lied, and Liberals swear to it.

There was no lie being told. You are attributing subjective speculations and opinions to claim a lie is being told. You can not use all of that analytical opinion leading up to a speculative conclusion to prove a lie. It can only be used as a reason for disagreement.
Distortions and omissions invalidate a thesis. Hence, your thesis fails. That means your college professors would have rejected it. It is nothing more than conspiracy trash.

I just proved that there were no distortions.....and you buried your foot in your mouth.

You were challenged on the method used to figure a primary fact of you thesis. The challenge is that you use an inappropriate method of unemployment calculation and that misuse distorts the points you are attempting to make. You do this all the time because it is necessary to distort in order to make your point. You use a method that calculates unemployment in the private sector, not unemployment as it applies to overall numbers in the population. Your method declares builders of the Golden Gate bridge, the Lincoln Tunnel, the Skyline Drive, thousand of schools, Navy facilities, Army Barracks, small airports, Post Offices, roads, etc. as being unemployed because they did not get their checks from private industry.

You've been challenged numerous times to tell the truth.

Why haven't you?

You are evading answering the challenge you have been given about the method of determining unemployment that you are using to promote your concept. You asked for an example of how you were being dishonest. I gave you one. Your response is to evade the challenge and ask a different question.

Know how to keep an idiot in suspense?


I'll tell you in a few minutes.

 

[Camp]

There was no lie being told. You are attributing subjective speculations and opinions to claim a lie is being told. You can not use all of that analytical opinion leading up to a speculative conclusion to prove a lie. It can only be used as a reason for disagreement.
Distortions and omissions invalidate a thesis. Hence, your thesis fails. That means your college professors would have rejected it. It is nothing more than conspiracy trash.

I just proved that there were no distortions.....and you buried your foot in your mouth.

You were challenged on the method used to figure a primary fact of you thesis. The challenge is that you use an inappropriate method of unemployment calculation and that misuse distorts the points you are attempting to make. You do this all the time because it is necessary to distort in order to make your point. You use a method that calculates unemployment in the private sector, not unemployment as it applies to overall numbers in the population. Your method declares builders of the Golden Gate bridge, the Lincoln Tunnel, the Skyline Drive, thousand of schools, Navy facilities, Army Barracks, small airports, Post Offices, roads, etc. as being unemployed because they did not get their checks from private industry.

You've been challenged numerous times to tell the truth.

Why haven't you?

You are evading answering the challenge you have been given about the method of determining unemployment that you are using to promote your concept. You asked for an example of how you were being dishonest. I gave you one. Your response is to evade the challenge and ask a different question.

Know how to keep an idiot in suspense?


I'll tell you in a few minutes.

I don't need your advice, I am doing just fine keeping you in suspense by making you try to figure out how to answer the challenges I have given you

 

[PoliticalChic]

I just proved that there were no distortions.....and you buried your foot in your mouth.

You were challenged on the method used to figure a primary fact of you thesis. The challenge is that you use an inappropriate method of unemployment calculation and that misuse distorts the points you are attempting to make. You do this all the time because it is necessary to distort in order to make your point. You use a method that calculates unemployment in the private sector, not unemployment as it applies to overall numbers in the population. Your method declares builders of the Golden Gate bridge, the Lincoln Tunnel, the Skyline Drive, thousand of schools, Navy facilities, Army Barracks, small airports, Post Offices, roads, etc. as being unemployed because they did not get their checks from private industry.

You've been challenged numerous times to tell the truth.

Why haven't you?

You are evading answering the challenge you have been given about the method of determining unemployment that you are using to promote your concept. You asked for an example of how you were being dishonest. I gave you one. Your response is to evade the challenge and ask a different question.

Know how to keep an idiot in suspense?


I'll tell you in a few minutes.

I don't need your advice, I am doing just fine keeping you in suspense by making you try to figure out how to answer the challenges I have given you

Be patient....just a few more minutes and you'll have an epiphany!

Guaranteed.

Veritas vos liberabit!