Republicans History Sweden

[midcan5]

It is curious how history seems to repeat itself. Laissez faire economics driven by republican and conservative partisans has brought the country again to financial and personal disaster. Hoover is alive and well on capital hill. And what do you hear from the republicans again: lower taxes. Are they missing reality or what! Did Bush not do that and did that not contribute to the trouble we are in now. History is a tough subject for some. And the democrats are equally guilty of buying into the idea deregulated markets will bring utopia.

"The Great Depression, to 1935"

"But Sweden would recover faster. This was the result of both a liberal monetary policy and public spending. A reduction in taxes for the average wage earner gave him more money to spend. A raised minimum wage increased the ability of low-income people to spend money. The government increased investments in public works. Federal money was pumped into unemployment insurance, medical care and old age pensions. The government willingly created a deficit, believing that it was emergency spending that would be paid back after the recovery. And with recovery being rapid and revenues increasing as a result of the rising economy, the deficits were quickly overcome.

Government participation in the economic life of Sweden had increased. The government supported farm prices and protective tariffs for farm products, and giving aid to the unemployed in farming areas helped to slow migration from the countryside into the cities. The Social Democrats gave labor the right to strike, but Sweden had a board that settled worker-management grievances, a board in which labor and management had confidence. And peace between labor and management benefited the economy.

Sweden's industrialists were disgruntled over higher taxes on their personal incomes, but they did not feel threatened to the extent that they withdrew from participating in the economic recovery. Manufacturing was to remain over 90 percent in the hands of capitalists, and business profits were left untaxed in order to stimulate rapid reinvestment. By 1936, industrial production in Sweden was 50 percent above what it had been in 1929 and unemployment had returned to 5 percent."

The Great Depression, to 1935

Summary

 

[Skull Pilot]

We've never had anything close to laissez faire economics.

http://mises.org/story/3165

Laissez-faire capitalism has a definite meaning, which is totally ignored, contradicted, and downright defiled by such statements as those quoted above. Laissez-faire capitalism is a politico-economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and in which the powers of the state are limited to the protection of the individual's rights against the initiation of physical force. This protection applies to the initiation of physical force by other private individuals, by foreign governments, and, most importantly, by the individual's own government. This last is accomplished by such means as a written constitution, a system of division of powers and checks and balances, an explicit bill of rights, and eternal vigilance on the part of a citizenry with the right to keep and bear arms. Under laissez-faire capitalism, the state consists essentially just of a police force, law courts, and a national defense establishment, which deter and combat those who initiate the use of physical force. And nothing more.

The utter absurdity of statements claiming that the present political-economic environment of the United States in some sense represents laissez-faire capitalism becomes as glaringly obvious as anything can be when one keeps in mind the extremely limited role of government under laissez-faire and then considers the following facts about the present-day United States:

1.

Government spending in the United States currently equals more than forty percent of national income, i.e., the sum of all wages and salaries and profits and interest earned in the country. This is without counting any of the massive off-budget spending such as that on account of the government enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Nor does it count any of the recent spending on assorted "bailouts." What this means is that substantially more than forty dollars of every one hundred dollars of output are appropriated by the government against the will of the individual citizens who produce that output. The money and the goods involved are turned over to the government only because the individual citizens wish to stay out of jail. Their freedom to dispose of their own incomes and output is thus violated on a colossal scale. In contrast, under laissez-faire capitalism, government spending would be on such a modest scale that a mere revenue tariff might be sufficient to support it. The corporate and individual income taxes, inheritance and capital gains taxes, and social security and Medicare taxes would not exist.
2.

There are presently fifteen federal cabinet departments, nine of which exist for the very purpose of respectively interfering with housing, transportation, healthcare, education, energy, mining, agriculture, labor, and commerce, and virtually all of which nowadays routinely ride roughshod over one or more important aspects of the economic freedom of the individual. Under laissez-faire capitalism, eleven of the fifteen cabinet departments would cease to exist and only the departments of justice, defense, state, and treasury would remain. Within those departments, moreover, further reductions would be made, such as the abolition of the IRS in the Treasury Department and the Antitrust Division in the Department of Justice.
3.

The economic interference of today's cabinet departments is reinforced and amplified by more than one hundred federal agencies and commissions, the most well known of which include, besides the IRS, the FRB and FDIC, the FBI and CIA, the EPA, FDA, SEC, CFTC, NLRB, FTC, FCC, FERC, FEMA, FAA, CAA, INS, OHSA, CPSC, NHTSA, EEOC, BATF, DEA, NIH, and NASA. Under laissez-faire capitalism, all such agencies and commissions would be done away with, with the exception of the FBI, which would be reduced to the legitimate functions of counterespionage and combating crimes against person or property that take place across state lines.
4.

To complete this catalog of government interference and its trampling of any vestige of laissez faire, as of the end of 2007, the last full year for which data are available, the Federal Register contained fully seventy-three thousand pages of detailed government regulations. This is an increase of more than ten thousand pages since 1978, the very years during which our system, according to one of The New York Times articles quoted above, has been "tilted in favor of business deregulation and against new rules." Under laissez-faire capitalism, there would be no Federal Register. The activities of the remaining government departments and their subdivisions would be controlled exclusively by duly enacted legislation, not the rule-making of unelected government officials.
5.

And, of course, to all of this must be added the further massive apparatus of laws, departments, agencies, and regulations at the state and local level. Under laissez-faire capitalism, these too for the most part would be completely abolished and what remained would reflect the same kind of radical reductions in the size and scope of government activity as those carried out on the federal level.

What this brief account has shown is that the politico-economic system of the United States today is so far removed from laissez-faire capitalism that it is closer to the system of a police state. The ability of the media to ignore all of the massive government interference that exists today and to characterize our present economic system as one of laissez faire and economic freedom marks it as, if not profoundly dishonest, then as nothing less than delusional.

 

[editec]

Laissez-faire capitalism has a definite meaning, which is totally ignored, contradicted, and downright defiled by such statements as those quoted above. Laissez-faire capitalism is a politico-economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and in which the powers of the state are limited to the protection of the individual's rights against the initiation of physical force. This protection applies to the initiation of physical force by other private individuals, by foreign governments, and, most importantly, by the individual's own government. This last is accomplished by such means as a written constitution, a system of division of powers and checks and balances, an explicit bill of rights, and eternal vigilance on the part of a citizenry with the right to keep and bear arms. Under laissez-faire capitalism, the state consists essentially just of a police force, law courts, and a national defense establishment, which deter and combat those who initiate the use of physical force. And nothing more.

Yeah, I believe that.

We have, and no nation on earth, has EVER had Laissez-faire capitalism.

If you have to tax AT ALL, you no longer have laissez-faire capitalism.

If you have any kind of government any kind of interference you don't have laissez-faire capitalism.

The Mises institute wants to cheat and claims that you can have government, but only a goverment which prvents people from stealing.

But that isn't laissez-faire capitalism, either.

Why not?

Because any kind of government must be paid for and that requires that the government can take from those what have, too.

We can have REAL laissez-faire capitalism the very moment that original sin is no longer a component of humankind.

Or in that case, we could have any kind of government or no goverment at all becaus e we wouldn't NEED government.

But until then?

We will have governments and those government will prevent the kind of FREEDOM that it takes to have laissez-faire capitalism.

Kind of a shame isn't it?

 

[Skull Pilot]

I don't have a problem with paying reasonable taxes to fund the activities of government expressly laid out in the Constitution.

I have a problem with more and bigger government spending programs which are tantamount to more waste and corruption.

How much is a reasonable tax?

How about 15% of income

 

[Truthmatters]

How about doing what fucking works instead of placing arbirtrary limits on something by just pulling it out of your spincter?

 

[Skull Pilot]

How about doing what fucking works instead of placing arbirtrary limits on something by just pulling it out of your spincter?

and a tax code of tens of thousands of p[ages is not full of arbitrary nonsense?

How much of your income are you willing to let the government spend?

Right now nearly the first four months of every year's labor is solely to pay taxes.
Wanna shoot for 6 months, 11 months, hey let's just give it all to our benevolent government.

 

[Truthmatters]

Why dont we shoot for what works by not doing stupid ass shit like listening to the buttwinks who got us into this republican concocted nightmare. Cutting Taxes in the middle of two wars was your teams idea of smart policy. I say we dont listen to your teams bullshit any more and that we do what works for a change.

http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/assissing-the-impact-of-the-fiscal-stimulus.pdf

 

[dilloduck]

Why dont we shoot for what works by not doing stupid ass shit like listening to the buttwinks who got us into this republican concocted nightmare. Cutting Taxes in the middle of two wars was your teams idea of smart policy. I say we dont listen to your teams bullshit any more and that we do what works for a change.

http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/assissing-the-impact-of-the-fiscal-stimulus.pdf

Why aren't you asking the democrats these questions--they are running the show in case you haven't heard .

 

[Mad Scientist]

"Republicans History Sweden."

Democrats History Russia.

 

[Truthmatters]

"Republicans History Sweden."

Democrats History Russia.

lying and stupid is no way to go through life dude.

buy a clue to reality

 

[nukeman]

Why dont we shoot for what works by not doing stupid ass shit like listening to the buttwinks who got us into this republican concocted nightmare. Cutting Taxes in the middle of two wars was your teams idea of smart policy. I say we dont listen to your teams bullshit any more and that we do what works for a change.

http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/assissing-the-impact-of-the-fiscal-stimulus.pdf

the
dems have held the congress and senate for going on 3 years now. What the fuck have they done with it?????? I tell you what, NOTHING... YOUR such a one trick poney you cant get over the fact that the vast majority of our problems stem from ........EASY CREDIT..... for anyone and everyone. Some people do not deserve credit due to their spending habits and inablility to PAY THEIR BILLS.

this credit crunch we are supposedly in is BS ONLY people with POOR credit can not receive credit right now and thats the way it should be.

Ohhh guess who instituted the less stringent rules for credit and said they would back it up. THE CLINTON ADMIN. You quickly forget that because your a liberal hack with a one track mind..... scratch that NO MIND..... IDIOT.....

 

[nukeman]

"Republicans History Sweden."

Democrats History Russia.

lying and stupid is no way to go through life dude.

buy a clue to reality

And you would know from personal experience!!!!!!!!!

 

[dilloduck]

"Republicans History Sweden."

Democrats History Russia.

lying and stupid is no way to go through life dude.

buy a clue to reality

take your own advice

 

[Truthmatters]

ran out of facts there Dillo?

 

[Truthmatters]

Why dont we shoot for what works by not doing stupid ass shit like listening to the buttwinks who got us into this republican concocted nightmare. Cutting Taxes in the middle of two wars was your teams idea of smart policy. I say we dont listen to your teams bullshit any more and that we do what works for a change.

http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/assissing-the-impact-of-the-fiscal-stimulus.pdf

the
dems have held the congress and senate for going on 3 years now. What the fuck have they done with it?????? I tell you what, NOTHING... YOUR such a one trick poney you cant get over the fact that the vast majority of our problems stem from ........EASY CREDIT..... for anyone and everyone. Some people do not deserve credit due to their spending habits and inablility to PAY THEIR BILLS.

this credit crunch we are supposedly in is BS ONLY people with POOR credit can not receive credit right now and thats the way it should be.

Ohhh guess who instituted the less stringent rules for credit and said they would back it up. THE CLINTON ADMIN. You quickly forget that because your a liberal hack with a one track mind..... scratch that NO MIND..... IDIOT.....

Ummm who is now the party that holds all the power?


I think they did a hell of a lot more than your team did for this country and the Vast majority of the American puplic agrees according to the vote totals.

 

[nukeman]

ran out of facts there Dillo?

You wouldn't know a fact if it crawled up your leg and piched your ass!!!!!!!!!!

 

[dilloduck]

ran out of facts there Dillo?

no--patience

 

[nukeman]

Why dont we shoot for what works by not doing stupid ass shit like listening to the buttwinks who got us into this republican concocted nightmare. Cutting Taxes in the middle of two wars was your teams idea of smart policy. I say we dont listen to your teams bullshit any more and that we do what works for a change.

http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/assissing-the-impact-of-the-fiscal-stimulus.pdf

the
dems have held the congress and senate for going on 3 years now. What the fuck have they done with it?????? I tell you what, NOTHING... YOUR such a one trick poney you cant get over the fact that the vast majority of our problems stem from ........EASY CREDIT..... for anyone and everyone. Some people do not deserve credit due to their spending habits and inablility to PAY THEIR BILLS.

this credit crunch we are supposedly in is BS ONLY people with POOR credit can not receive credit right now and thats the way it should be.

Ohhh guess who instituted the less stringent rules for credit and said they would back it up. THE CLINTON ADMIN. You quickly forget that because your a liberal hack with a one track mind..... scratch that NO MIND..... IDIOT.....

Ummm who is now the party that holds all the power?


I think they did a hell of a lot more than your team did for this country and the Vast majority of the American puplic agrees according to the vote totals.

Vast Majority?????? If you call 26% of eligible voters the "vast majority" You are stupid aren't you!!!!!!!



And what the hell does that have to do with EASY CREDIT made available to people who COULD NOT AFFORD TO PAY IT BACK. You are as stupid as ever!!!!! My God i cna't believe they have let you sit around here for over 5000 post..... What are you the board idiot!!!!!! Oh wait I know the answer to that already YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Toro]

It is curious how history seems to repeat itself. Laissez faire economics driven by republican and conservative partisans has brought the country again to financial and personal disaster. Hoover is alive and well on capital hill. And what do you hear from the republicans again: lower taxes. Are they missing reality or what! Did Bush not do that and did that not contribute to the trouble we are in now. History is a tough subject for some. And the democrats are equally guilty of buying into the idea deregulated markets will bring utopia.

"The Great Depression, to 1935"

"But Sweden would recover faster. This was the result of both a liberal monetary policy and public spending. A reduction in taxes for the average wage earner gave him more money to spend. A raised minimum wage increased the ability of low-income people to spend money. The government increased investments in public works. Federal money was pumped into unemployment insurance, medical care and old age pensions. The government willingly created a deficit, believing that it was emergency spending that would be paid back after the recovery. And with recovery being rapid and revenues increasing as a result of the rising economy, the deficits were quickly overcome.

Government participation in the economic life of Sweden had increased. The government supported farm prices and protective tariffs for farm products, and giving aid to the unemployed in farming areas helped to slow migration from the countryside into the cities. The Social Democrats gave labor the right to strike, but Sweden had a board that settled worker-management grievances, a board in which labor and management had confidence. And peace between labor and management benefited the economy.

Sweden's industrialists were disgruntled over higher taxes on their personal incomes, but they did not feel threatened to the extent that they withdrew from participating in the economic recovery. Manufacturing was to remain over 90 percent in the hands of capitalists, and business profits were left untaxed in order to stimulate rapid reinvestment. By 1936, industrial production in Sweden was 50 percent above what it had been in 1929 and unemployment had returned to 5 percent."

The Great Depression, to 1935

Summary

I think there are a couple things wrong with this post.

First, given the actions of the Bush government, this certainly is not the Hoover administration.

Second, this is not a crisis of American "laissez-faire" capitalism. This is a crisis of financial capitalism. BTW, Sweden had a banking crisis in 1984 which was arguably relatively bigger than what we are going through now.

Finally, the conservatives - who are wrong about FDR causing the Depression - do have a point about the 1935 NRA stunting the recovery from the Depression, which Sweden did not have, though other FDR policies such as the implementation of the FDIC and public works programs did benefit the economy. Thus, one would expect Sweden to recover faster than America.

 

[midcan5]

Glad to see a few actually addressed the thread and not just their paltry knowledge of economics in the 20th century. But Toro Bush was like Hoover if not worse, and I think, unlike Hoover, he was glad to leave. The actions taken only came because Bush was lost and just as he listened in the past, he listened now to Paulsen et al. Let's face it and be honest, Bush was over his head from day one.

This is a crisis of capitalism label it anyway but it has failed again. Government, democracy and the sharing of power is the reason we still have order. Stability resides in those institutions, even the (some) conservatives recognize we have to bail out a system that has failed. Or maybe I should say people who have failed but what really is the difference.

The NRA was ruled unconstitutional but its goals became another way of doing things. My parent's generation lived the depression and their stories amazed me. In the end the power of labor and of unions made our middle class - until Reagan and corporate greed started their destruction - they created some pretty good lives for the spoiled brat libertarians who came next. The pensions and wages of the post war generation were the highest ever in spite of incredible taxes on wealth.

"The National Recovery Administration (NRA) came into being through a significant measure in 1933. The NRA attempted to revive industry by raising wages, reducing work hours and reining in unbridled competition. The NRA was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 1935; however, the majority of its collective bargaining stipulations survived in two subsequent bills."

The Great Depression