Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
One could argue that Franklin Roosevelt hated business. His family had been rich for generations. He viewed businessmen as social inferiors.
Nevertheless, there was nearly as much economic growth during his first term as during the terms of Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge. There was certainly more job creation. After his inauguration in 1933 there was a steady decline in unemployment except for a year after 1937 when he reduced government spending.
Roosevelt's method of ending the Great Depression was fairly simple. He raised taxes on the well to do, hired people at government expense, and raised wages of people in the private sector by passing a minimum wage law and by strengthening labor unions.
Those who claim that the New Deal did not end the Great Depression, the Second World War did, forget that military spending and employment is government spending and employment.
More recently, from the presidencies of Harry Truman to that of George W. Bush there was nearly always more job creation per year under Democratic presidents than under Republican presidents.
One could argue that Franklin Roosevelt hated business. His family had been rich for generations. He viewed businessmen as social inferiors.
Nevertheless, there was nearly as much economic growth during his first term as during the terms of Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge. There was certainly more job creation. After his inauguration in 1933 there was a steady decline in unemployment except for a year after 1937 when he reduced government spending.
Roosevelt's method of ending the Great Depression was fairly simple. He raised taxes on the well to do, hired people at government expense, and raised wages of people in the private sector by passing a minimum wage law and by strengthening labor unions.
Those who claim that the New Deal did not end the Great Depression, the Second World War did, forget that military spending and employment is government spending and employment.
More recently, from the presidencies of Harry Truman to that of George W. Bush there was nearly always more job creation per year under Democratic presidents than under Republican presidents.
Those are really only attributed to cyclical booms and economic recovers. There is really only one President who presided under a period of genuine economic growth, and that President is Dwight Eisenhower.
Those are really only attributed to cyclical booms and economic recovers. There is really only one President who presided under a period of genuine economic growth, and that President is Dwight Eisenhower.
Your other assertions did not disprove what I earlier said, so I will discuss the presidency of Dwight Eisenhower.
During his presidency the top tax rate never got below 91 percent. Now it is 40 percent.
Top Tax Rate on Regular Income
The effective top tax rate under Eisenhower was 66.4 percent. Now it is 32.4 percent.
The Vampire Economy | DNDN Message Board Posts
During the Eisenhower administration over twenty-five percent of the labor force belonged to labor unions. Now it is about twelve percent.
http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1176&context=key_workplace
High taxes on the rich and strong labor unions were legacies of the Roosevelt administration.
Nevertheless, under President Truman an average of 1,200,000 jobs were created per year.
Under President Eisenhower this declined to 438,000.
Under John Kennedy this rose to 1,200,000
Bush On Jobs: The Worst Track Record On Record - Real Time Economics - WSJ
Under Kennedy the top tax rate remained at 91 percent. The military buildup for Vietnam had not yet begun.
Those are really only attributed to cyclical booms and economic recovers. There is really only one President who presided under a period of genuine economic growth, and that President is Dwight Eisenhower.
I'd "work across the aisle" w/ her 
Those are really only attributed to cyclical booms and economic recovers. There is really only one President who presided under a period of genuine economic growth, and that President is Dwight Eisenhower.
You consider the current "downturn" as "cyclical"?
BTW- love your avie
Those are really only attributed to cyclical booms and economic recovers. There is really only one President who presided under a period of genuine economic growth, and that President is Dwight Eisenhower.
You consider the current "downturn" as "cyclical"?
BTW- love your avie
Yes, in regards to cyclical unemployment. Economic expansions and recessions are a natural part of the business cycle. When business cycles are at their peak, economic output is maximized and unemployment will be low. When this falls, the business cycle falls lower and unemployment rises.
These two are very good reads about what led up to the orgy on Wall St.
The Big Short - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Big Short: Inside the Doomsday Machine
Griftopia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Griftopia: Bubble Machines, Vampire Squids, and the Long Con That Is Breaking America
You consider the current "downturn" as "cyclical"?
BTW- love your avie
Yes, in regards to cyclical unemployment. Economic expansions and recessions are a natural part of the business cycle. When business cycles are at their peak, economic output is maximized and unemployment will be low. When this falls, the business cycle falls lower and unemployment rises.
So you're saying the recent/current economic downturn is cyclical?
You ever read "The Big Short" by an author who worked on Wall Street in the early 1980's & also Wrote "Liar's Poker"? He spells out what happened, basically brazen theft through fraud.
These two are very good reads about what led up to the orgy on Wall St.
The Big Short - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Griftopia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Griftopia: Bubble Machines, Vampire Squids, and the Long Con That Is Breaking America
You ever read "The Big Short" by an author who worked on Wall Street in the early 1980's & also Wrote "Liar's Poker"? He spells out what happened, basically brazen theft through fraud.
you're getting in over your head. Theft & fraud/gaming the system for personal gain are the primary culprits. Tranches, credit default swaps, etc... Everything else is merely a result of the former.I'll add this one. It's a case study in Big Government Cronyism...
if true why so afraid to present your best evidence? Perhaps as a liberal you lack the IQ to do so?Bia!!! You don't have the IQ to post in this thread!!!
Sen. Levin Grills Goldman Sachs Exec On "Shitty Deal" E-mail - YouTube
You still never answered who that is in your avie. Pamela Anderson
Only 352 people who filed their income taxes in 1954 paid at the top marginal/effective rate. Today you have millions upon millions paying an effective rate which is much closer to that of the marginal rate.
In 1954, the Top 50% accounted for 6% of all federal tax revenue. Today, the Top 50% account for 97.21% of all federal tax revenue. The rich got away with much tax evasion during the 1950's. Even if the effective rate was higher, you are talking about an effective rate of 66% on $50.000 Today, it's an effective rate of 32.4% on $398.350.
And we increasingly see how useless this legacy is. The rich does everything in their power to avoid taxation. Corporate profits are at all time highs, and these corporations will not hire Americans. They're shifting their resources in countries which are more business friendly. Coca-Cola has already said China is more business friendly than America. Apple would rather go into debt than repatriate $41 billion dollars worth of profits.
There is no longer a need for labour unions. Aside from the fact that labour unions distort market demand and encourage anti-competitive policies via the Government, work today has become increasingly individualised.
Truman was transitioning from a wartime economy to a peace time economy, essentially an economic recovery. Many of those men were coming home to be with their families and to start working an an actual economy. When all you have is a penny, and you find another penny lying on the street, congratulations, you've just doubled your money. He started from rock bottom. Hardly something to brag about.
The same thing happened with JFK. His presidency began during an economic downturn. Unemployment shot up as high as 7.1%. Again, the only preceded to preside under true economic growth was Eisenhower. He didn't inherent an economic downturn and he didn't preside during an asset bubble.
Only 352 people who filed their income taxes in 1954 paid at the top marginal/effective rate. Today you have millions upon millions paying an effective rate which is much closer to that of the marginal rate.
In 1954, the Top 50% accounted for 6% of all federal tax revenue. Today, the Top 50% account for 97.21% of all federal tax revenue. The rich got away with much tax evasion during the 1950's. Even if the effective rate was higher, you are talking about an effective rate of 66% on $50.000 Today, it's an effective rate of 32.4% on $398.350.
Excuse me. Are you saying that in 1954 the top half of the income distribution paid 6 percent of federal tax revenue? I am sorry. That does not pass the laugh test.
Kennedy actually decreased taxes to the marginal rate of 75%. At least I think that's what happened.
