What do you think of the New Deal of the 1930s? Good or bad?
MoneyMoneyMoney
- Thread starter PoliticalChic
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #22
7. Based on the hagiography, one can't help but be surprised at how mediocre young Franklin was at just about everything. Prep school was Groton, college, Harvard....excelling at neither sports nor academics. "I can't understand this thing about Frank. He never amounted to much at school." "BEFORE THE TRUMPET: Young Franklin Roosevelt, 1882-1905," by Geoffrey C. Ward,, p. 180-181
a. A 'C to C+' student; not much for homework, study, or research....but he focused on social-political clubs, debates and journalism.
8. Now....about Roosevelt's enduring grudge against capitalism and capitalists......
Not the only rejection, but a significant one, was his attempt to join Porcellian, the oldest and most elite social club at Harvard. Theodore Roosevelt and other members of the Roosevelt family belonged to the club, but Franklin D. Roosevelt, who was president of the Harvard Crimson, never managed to be elected a member. At some time, in his late thirties, he told his relative Sheffield Cowles that this had been "the greatest disappointment in his life". Frances Richardson Keller, Fictions of U. S. History : A Theory & Four Illustrations, p. 116.
Porcellian members were future entrepreneurs, businessmen, bankers, and corporate lawyers.
And they had rejected Franklin Roosevelt.
a. A 'C to C+' student; not much for homework, study, or research....but he focused on social-political clubs, debates and journalism.
8. Now....about Roosevelt's enduring grudge against capitalism and capitalists......
Not the only rejection, but a significant one, was his attempt to join Porcellian, the oldest and most elite social club at Harvard. Theodore Roosevelt and other members of the Roosevelt family belonged to the club, but Franklin D. Roosevelt, who was president of the Harvard Crimson, never managed to be elected a member. At some time, in his late thirties, he told his relative Sheffield Cowles that this had been "the greatest disappointment in his life". Frances Richardson Keller, Fictions of U. S. History : A Theory & Four Illustrations, p. 116.
Porcellian members were future entrepreneurs, businessmen, bankers, and corporate lawyers.
And they had rejected Franklin Roosevelt.
The Russians lost more men in Stalingrad than we lost in the entire war, they were not afraid to take casualties. They had the most powerful army on the planet so I wonder if Patton was just blowing smoke. At any rate, if he had taken Berlin but the Russians didn't accept it what would we have done? Marched on to Moscow like Napoleon and Hitler?
- Thread starter
- #24
The New Deal was Mussolini's Fascism imposed on America.
1. Rex Tugwell was opposed to any private business not controlled by the government. General Hugh Johnson was working with Tugwell on a bill to create the NRA, and gave Francis Perkins the book by Rafaello Viglione, "The Corporate State," in which the neat Italian system of dictatorship for the benefit of the people was glowingly described."
Francis Perkins, "The Roosevelt I Knew." The NRA was copied from Mussolini's corporative system. p.47
a. Perkins questioned whether Johnson 'really understood the democratic process..." New Dealers had no problem with the fascist nature of their plans.
b. " Fascism did not acquire an evil name in Washington until Hitler became a menace to·the Soviet Union." Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p. 48
2. " As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer. ... In its day (the 1920s and 1930s), fascism was seen as the happy medium between boom-and-bust-prone liberal capitalism, with its alleged class conflict, wasteful competition, and profit-oriented egoism, and revolutionary Marxism, with its violent and socially divisive persecution of the bourgeoisie. Fascism substituted the particularity of nationalism and racialism—“blood and soil”—for the internationalism of both classical liberalism and Marxism.....
.... Mussolini praised the New Deal as “boldly . . . interventionist in the field of economics,” and Roosevelt complimented Mussolini for his “honest purpose of restoring Italy” and acknowledged that he kept “in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman.” Also, Hugh Johnson, head of the National Recovery Administration, was known to carry a copy of Raffaello Viglione’s pro-Mussolini book, The Corporate State, with him, presented a copy to Labor Secretary Frances Perkins, and, on retirement, paid tribute to the Italian dictator." Fascism - Econlib
My beliefs?
individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.
“free markets, free voices, free people”
- Thread starter
- #25
Gads, you're a moron.
The Russians killed them themselves!!!!!!!!!!!!!
World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.
The Soviet Union killed more than twenty million men, women and children.
Former USSR leader Joseph Stalin is estimated to have killed millions of people for various reasons. Reports from the Soviet archives show prisoners under Stalin's regime who were executed either for political or criminal offences. Around 158,000 soldiers were also executed for deserting the war. http://www.ask.com/question/why-did-stalin-kill-so-many-people
"Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"
- Thread starter
- #26
Did I mention that you're a moron???
It bears mentioning again: You're a moron.
Russians would do anything not to return to Roosevelt's pal's 'paradise.'
The 850,000 strong army of Gen. Andrei Andreyevich Vlasov, having gone to the other side, Germany, "to save their country from Stalin" and having later surrendered to US forces, "formed the core of those forcebly repatritated between 1944 and 1947."
"Operation Keelhaul; The Story of Forced Repatriation from 1944 to the Present.by Julius Epstein p.27, 53.
a. Gen. Deniken, former commanding general of the White Russian armies which were supported by the USA in 1917-1920, explained that none of these men served in the Nazi army out of love for Germany..."they hated the Germans" he wrote....rather, they knew what awaited them in the 'Soviet paradise.'
More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal"byNikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.
Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:
"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men,
they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a ******* swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" p. 383
How badly did these individuals not want to go to Stalin's USSR? From the NYTimes, January 20, 1946: "Ten renegade Russian soldiers, in a frenzy of terror over their impending repatriation to the homeland, committed suicide today during a riot in the Dachau prison camp...."
a. And, in the Times, March 5, 1946: " - Many thousands of persons hostile to the present regime in the Soviet Union are being forcibly sent there....the Catholic Church constantly received appeals from 'displaced persons' terrified of being sent back to territory now controlled by Russia."
Yes....you're a moron and a dupe of government schooling.
- Thread starter
- #29
In no way is this a compliment to Stalin.....but he was far smarter that Roosevelt, Hitler or Mussolini.
We are seeing the results of his work long after his death......starting with his United Nations, and the current Democrat Party.
Interesting book:
- Thread starter
- #30
9. Money is not evil. Nor is ambition, or the desire for profit.
Often misquoted as ‘The business of America is business,” Republican Coolidge really said:
“... After all, the chief business of the American people is business. They are profoundly concerned with producing, buying, selling, investing and prospering in the world. I am strongly of opinion that the great majority of people will always find these are moving impulses of our life. … Wealth is the product of industry, ambition, character and untiring effort. In all experience, the accumulation of wealth means the multiplication of schools, the increase of knowledge, the dissemination of intelligence, the encouragement of science, the broadening of outlook, the expansion of liberties, the widening of culture. Of course, the accumulation of wealth cannot be justified as the chief end of existence. But we are compelled to recognize it as a means to well-nigh every desirable achievement. So long as wealth is made the means and not the end, we need not greatly fear it.”
January 17, 1925 Given before the American Society of Newspaper Editors
Coolidge was a tax cutter and a model for Ronald Reagan’s “supply-side” economics. He understood that tax cuts would work in the way the Laffer Curve explained. In 1924 SOTU he said “the larger incomes of the country would actually yield more revenue to the government if the basis of taxation were scientifically revised downward….when the taxation of large incomes is excessive they tend to disappear.”
"I agree perfectly with those who wish to relieve the small taxpayer by getting the largest possible contribution from the people with large incomes. But if the rates on large incomes are so high that they disappear, the small taxpayer will be left to bear the entire burden. If on the other hand, the rates are placed where they will produce the most revenue from large incomes, then the small taxpayer will be relieved." Quotable Coolidge
Ask yourself.....what is the reasonable rate of taxation?
Often misquoted as ‘The business of America is business,” Republican Coolidge really said:
“... After all, the chief business of the American people is business. They are profoundly concerned with producing, buying, selling, investing and prospering in the world. I am strongly of opinion that the great majority of people will always find these are moving impulses of our life. … Wealth is the product of industry, ambition, character and untiring effort. In all experience, the accumulation of wealth means the multiplication of schools, the increase of knowledge, the dissemination of intelligence, the encouragement of science, the broadening of outlook, the expansion of liberties, the widening of culture. Of course, the accumulation of wealth cannot be justified as the chief end of existence. But we are compelled to recognize it as a means to well-nigh every desirable achievement. So long as wealth is made the means and not the end, we need not greatly fear it.”
January 17, 1925 Given before the American Society of Newspaper Editors
Coolidge was a tax cutter and a model for Ronald Reagan’s “supply-side” economics. He understood that tax cuts would work in the way the Laffer Curve explained. In 1924 SOTU he said “the larger incomes of the country would actually yield more revenue to the government if the basis of taxation were scientifically revised downward….when the taxation of large incomes is excessive they tend to disappear.”
"I agree perfectly with those who wish to relieve the small taxpayer by getting the largest possible contribution from the people with large incomes. But if the rates on large incomes are so high that they disappear, the small taxpayer will be left to bear the entire burden. If on the other hand, the rates are placed where they will produce the most revenue from large incomes, then the small taxpayer will be relieved." Quotable Coolidge
Ask yourself.....what is the reasonable rate of taxation?
The Russians where ruthless and cruel and had no compassion for their friends OR their enemies. Yet that is the country you would have declared war upon when they were at their greatest power. Even a moron could see that is a poor idea. We easily beat Saddam yet can anyone say we won anything?
Gads, you're a moron.
The Russians killed them themselves!!!!!!!!!!!!!
World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans. Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.
The Soviet Union killed more than twenty million men, women and children.
Former USSR leader Joseph Stalin is estimated to have killed millions of people for various reasons. Reports from the Soviet archives show prisoners under Stalin's regime who were executed either for political or criminal offences. Around 158,000 soldiers were also executed for deserting the war. http://www.ask.com/question/why-did-stalin-kill-so-many-people
"Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"
You do love your straw men. I don't recall saying anything nice about Stalin, you were the one who complimented his intelligence.
- Thread starter
- #34
Exactly so.
"Hell, why do we care what those goddamn Russians think? We are going to have to fight them sooner or later, within the next generation. Why not do it now while our Army is intact and the damn Russians can have their hind end kicked back to Russia in three months? We can do it easily with the help of the German troops we have, if we just arm them and take them with us. They hate the bastards.[92]
These actions were all Eisenhower could handle; he could not cover this one up and had no choice but to relieve Patton of his command. Patton was personally hurt by the loss."
Military History Online
Patton was correct.
Roosevelt not.
- Thread starter
- #35
10. Government doesn’t ‘earn’ any money. It simply prints it and protects the value of money.
And that’s where the difference between Leftwing and Rightwing governance divides. The Left is less interested in creating wealth than in distributing it.
While the Judeo-Christian society labels actions as ‘good’ or ‘evil,’ due to morality and/or self-control, the Left sees the results as due to material inequality, i.e., violent crime due to poverty.
The Left has been far more interested in fighting material inequality than tyranny, which is why Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, Castro, etc., tend to have the support of Leftists around the world.
Based on the failure of Leftist governments, it is imperative for the Democrats to hide their view of money.
“....we are now free of that inordinate fear of communism.... “Jimmy Carter Jimmy Carter: UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME - Address at Commencement Exercises at the University
President Barack Obama downplayed the differences between capitalism and communism, claiming that they are just “intellectual arguments.” He urged those at a town hall event in Buenos Aires, Argentina on Wednesday to “just choose from what works.”
Obama Downplays Difference Between Capitalism, Communism [VIDEO]
And that’s where the difference between Leftwing and Rightwing governance divides. The Left is less interested in creating wealth than in distributing it.
While the Judeo-Christian society labels actions as ‘good’ or ‘evil,’ due to morality and/or self-control, the Left sees the results as due to material inequality, i.e., violent crime due to poverty.
The Left has been far more interested in fighting material inequality than tyranny, which is why Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, Castro, etc., tend to have the support of Leftists around the world.
Based on the failure of Leftist governments, it is imperative for the Democrats to hide their view of money.
“....we are now free of that inordinate fear of communism.... “Jimmy Carter Jimmy Carter: UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME - Address at Commencement Exercises at the University
President Barack Obama downplayed the differences between capitalism and communism, claiming that they are just “intellectual arguments.” He urged those at a town hall event in Buenos Aires, Argentina on Wednesday to “just choose from what works.”
Obama Downplays Difference Between Capitalism, Communism [VIDEO]
- Thread starter
- #36
11. The American version of the Socialist Party, the Democrats, has become extremely good at taking money from earners and using it to buy votes.
Taxation, according to the Right is to pay for the legitimate functions of government, which are found in the Constitution, article 1, section 8, the enumerated powers. And taxes collected in excess to those need are to be returned via tax cuts.
Somehow, Liberals believe that they should take what is more than their “fair share.” Somehow, taxes, fees, fines, whatever, and you end up giving about half of what you earn to the government.
Who is to decide what is fair, and what is too much? Some religions suggest tithing, and government demands taxes.
Joseph gathered very much grain: It seems it was customary for Pharaoh to take 10% of the grain in Egypt as a tax. Essentially, Joseph doubled the taxes over the next seven years (Genesis 41:34 mentions one-fifth, that is, 20%).
That 20% figure appears again in the relationship of colonists to North America, and the English crown "....colonists were free to retain all the profits and fruits of their labor save for the crown's 20 percent share of any gold and silver discovered."
"Freedom Just Around the Corner: A New American History: 1585-1828," by Walter A. McDougall, p.33
Soooo.....how much do the wealthy 'owe'???????
The unspoken assumption is that there is something morally wrong with inequalities. Where is the explanation of what would be a ‘fair share’ for the wealthy to give up? Irving Kristol, as editor of ‘Public Interest,’ wrote to professors who had written about the unfairness of income distribution, asking them to write an article as to what a ‘fair distribution’ would be; he has never gotten that article.
Irving Kristol, “Neoconservative: the Autobiography of an Idea,” p. 166
Taxation, according to the Right is to pay for the legitimate functions of government, which are found in the Constitution, article 1, section 8, the enumerated powers. And taxes collected in excess to those need are to be returned via tax cuts.
Somehow, Liberals believe that they should take what is more than their “fair share.” Somehow, taxes, fees, fines, whatever, and you end up giving about half of what you earn to the government.
Who is to decide what is fair, and what is too much? Some religions suggest tithing, and government demands taxes.
Joseph gathered very much grain: It seems it was customary for Pharaoh to take 10% of the grain in Egypt as a tax. Essentially, Joseph doubled the taxes over the next seven years (Genesis 41:34 mentions one-fifth, that is, 20%).
That 20% figure appears again in the relationship of colonists to North America, and the English crown "....colonists were free to retain all the profits and fruits of their labor save for the crown's 20 percent share of any gold and silver discovered."
"Freedom Just Around the Corner: A New American History: 1585-1828," by Walter A. McDougall, p.33
Soooo.....how much do the wealthy 'owe'???????
The unspoken assumption is that there is something morally wrong with inequalities. Where is the explanation of what would be a ‘fair share’ for the wealthy to give up? Irving Kristol, as editor of ‘Public Interest,’ wrote to professors who had written about the unfairness of income distribution, asking them to write an article as to what a ‘fair distribution’ would be; he has never gotten that article.
Irving Kristol, “Neoconservative: the Autobiography of an Idea,” p. 166
Interesting pick since Coolidge's presidency ended in the Great Depression
- Thread starter
- #38
This was the hallmark of the Coolidge administration:
The 1920s were an age of dramatic social and political change. For the first time, more Americans lived in cities than on farms. The nation’s total wealth more than doubled between 1920 and 1929, and this economic growth swept many Americans into an affluent but unfamiliar “consumer society.” Roaring Twenties
The 1920s earned their moniker—the "Roaring Twenties"—through the decade's real and sustained prosperity, dizzying technological advancements, and lively culture. The decade marked the flourishing of the modern mass-production, mass-consumption economy, which delivered fantastic profits to investors while also raising the living standard of the urban middle- and working-class. The 1920s Analysis | Shmoop
A tide of economic and social change swept across the country in the 1920s. Nicknames for the decade, such as “the Jazz Age” or “the Roaring Twenties,” convey something of the excitement and the changes in social conventions that were taking place at the time. As the economy boomed, wages rose for most Americans and prices fell, resulting in a higher standard of living and a dramatic increase in consumer consumption.... The American economy's phenomenal growth rate during the '20s...." A New Society: Economic & Social Change
Then, a recession that Democrat Roosevelt turned into a Depression.
You must be a government school grad, huh?
At least they teach us history. Hoover was in office for 4 years and did nothing to end the Depression. America turned to Roosevelt for help because the GOP offered none. What really cemented the Depression was the Smoot-Hawley tariff under the GOP.
- Thread starter
- #40
"Hoover was in office for 4 years and did nothing to end the Depression."
Being the dunce that you are, you miss the most significant aspect of the Hoover-Roosevelt exchange.
Roosevelt ran for office promising to use the Harding method of ending a recession...
. America’s greatest depression fighter was (Republican) Warren Gamaliel Harding. An Ohio senator when he was elected president in 1920, he followed (Democrat) Woodrow Wilson who got America into World War I, ...Harding inherited the mess, in particular the post-World War I depression – almost as severe, from peak to trough, as the Great Contraction from 1929 to 1933, that FDR inherited and prolonged. Richard K. Vedder and Lowell E. Gallaway, in their book Out of Work (1993), noted that the magnitude of the 1920 depression "exceeded that for the Great Depression of the following decade for several quarters." The estimated gross national product plunged 24% from $91.5 billion in 1920 to $69.6 billion in 1921. The number of unemployed people jumped from 2.1 million in 1920 to 4.9 million in 1921.
Then he did exactly what Hoover did to engineer a recession.....the opposite of what he knew would end the recession!!!!!!!
October 19, 1932, he nailed Hoover, observing that in recent years federal expenses had increased by $1 billion "and that I may add, is the most reckless and extravagant past that I have been able to discover in the statistical record of any peacetime Government anywhere, any time." http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=88399
"...[a] month after accepting the Democratic Party’s nomination for the office of president of the United States, Franklin Delano Roosevelt delivered a campaign radio address to the nation. He focused on the extravagant spending policies of Herbert Hoover’s administration and the federal budget deficits it had created: “Let us have the courage to stop borrowing to meet continuing deficits,” Roosevelt said. “Revenues must cover expenditures by one means or another. Any government, like any family, can, for a year, spend a little more than it earns. But you know and I know that a continuation of that habit means the poorhouse.”
Monetary Central Planning and the State Part 13 FDR s New Deal - The Future of Freedom Foundation
. And this: "... carrying out the plain precept of our Party, which is to reduce the cost of current Federal Government operations by 25 percent." Ibid.
FDR's promises!!!
And.....the very same plan that Harding used to tame an earlier upheaval.
And it worked.
...to begin with, in March of 1933, he didn't fill his cabinet with persons committed to a balanced budget. A pretty much poke 'in your eye.'
Nah....instead the bunch put together the huge spending and administrative expansion of his first hundred day, Douglas knew the real deal.
Roosevelt expanded the federal government and ran up deficits much greater than those of Hoover.
Now....just between us, Do you feel it necessary to put on Chapstick before you lubricate the Democrat Party's boots with your lips?
Last edited:
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
Early Voting Begins Today for Virginia Redistricting Referendum- Started by 1srelluc
- Replies: 0
-
-
Teen caught trying to assassinate Trump, thought he was a part of the Left wing revolution- Started by Votto
- Replies: 8
-
Putin threatening to turn off gas supplies to Europe for aiding US on Iran strikes
- Started by 1srelluc
- Replies: 14
