Roosevelt: His Bankrupt Policies

[CrusaderFrank]

Frank, the socio-economic-geopolitical situations were different. Do you understand?

You cannot critically think, can you?

You are guilty of a fallacy of false equivalences. The situations are different not equivalent.

Jake, stop pretending.

Just, stop.

You're making a mockery of yourself, I mean more so than usual

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I told you that Frank does not understand, Rshemer.

Do you believe me now?

Jake, thinks he's clever but he's in way over his pointy head.

I know it.

He knows it.

He's trying to tell us 2 terms of 20% Unemployment is superior to 2 terms of 3% UE.

I am telling you what did not hurt the economy in 1921 severely hurt it in 1936 and 1937, because the situations were different. Frank cannot think clearly.

Jake,

1920-21: No government intervention. 3% Unemployment 2 terms -- The Roaring 20's

1929-1940: Massive, unprecedented government Jihad on the Free Enterprise. Worst economy in human history, worse than the 7 Biblical lean Years

Jesus, CF, Does being that stupid hurt? There have been many times with little unemployment. And when that is the case, no intervention is required. But when things go crazy, as they did in 1929, in what has become known as the Great Republican Depression of 1929, you have two options. 1. Do something about it. Or, 2. Do nothing about it annd watch a depression occur. Worst unemployment in US history.
Then, as a republican troll, blame it on the president you hand the shit over to. Do not try to understand anything, because you are too stupid. And complain about the fastest recovery in US history.

Then, as a con troll, continue to blame those not in office when it happened, and prove you are butt stupid.
got it. You are butt stupid, and incapable of rational conversation. You are indeed incapable of thought. I have an econ degree. You would be laughed out. You want to start a new econ agenda. Try Regent University. It would like your delusion.

FDR's first two terms were total failure even after spending the equivalent of $3 Trillion dollars. The failure was FDR's, not the economy's

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I have an econ degree.

then you ought to know that total liberal control of the US economy from 1929 to 1935 and of the soviet economy from 1917 to 1991 was a total disaster.

"You want to know what Fascism is? It is like your New Deal."
-- Mussolini, during a visit to New York City

-W.E.B DuBois: (the most important black leader in the first half of the 20th Century) "Joseph Stalin was a great man; few other men of the 20th Century approach his stature. The formation of the Nazi dictatorship was absolutely necessary to get the state in order." In 1937 he proclaimed: "there is today more democracy in Germany than there has been in years past." (page 10)

-Guy Tugwell: (FDR Brain Trust) said of fascism: "It's the cleanest, neatest piece...of social machinery I've ever seen." ( page 11)

-Walter Lippman: called on FDR to be a "dictator." (page 11)

-H.G. Wells: "progressives must become "liberal fascists and enlightened Nazis" ( page 21)


-Woodrow Wilson: "our problem...to make kids as unlike their fathers as we can" (page 92)

-Woodrow Wilson: "Jefferson has passed...American is not a place for unrestricted individual enterprise" ( page 93).

-Woodrow Wilson: "Bismark's welfare state is the most perfected in the world" ( page 95)

-Charles Beard: "fascism is an amazing experiment in reconciling individualism and socialism" (page 100)

--W.E.B. Dubois: "I stand in wonder...I am a Bolshevik"


-H.G. Wells : called for "a 'Phoenix Rebirth' of Liberalism under the banner of Liberal Fascism" ( page 134)

-George Orwell: (met FDR at White House often) "Much of what H.G. Wells has imagined and worked for is physically there in Nazi Germany"(page 135)


-Nazi newspaper: described Roosevelt as a man of irreproachable, extremely responsible character and immovable will... with a profound understanding of social needs...with nationalist socialist strains of thought in his economic and social policies" ( page 147)

-Mussolini: "America has a dictator in FDR" ( page 148)

-Rexford Tugwell: in 1934 "I find Italy doing many of the things which seem to me necessary" (page 156)

--Harry Hopkins: (new deal Communist) "that we (those in FDR Administration) are not afraid of exploring anything within the law, and we have lawyers who will declare anything you want to do legal" ( page 159)

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

FDR's first two terms were total failure even after spending the equivalent of $3 Trillion dollars. The failure was FDR's, not the economy's

Yes, liberals would have us believe that 16 years of The Great Depression was a wonderful time economically. This would be like believing that the Civil War was a wonderfully peaceful time!!

No surprise, throughout human history humans have loved Hitler Stalin Mao and all the other great liberal leaders who killed so many hundreds of millions.

 

[Rshermr]

I told you that Frank does not understand, Rshemer.

Do you believe me now?

Jake, thinks he's clever but he's in way over his pointy head.

I know it.

He knows it.

He's trying to tell us 2 terms of 20% Unemployment is superior to 2 terms of 3% UE.

I am telling you what did not hurt the economy in 1921 severely hurt it in 1936 and 1937, because the situations were different. Frank cannot think clearly.

Jake,

1920-21: No government intervention. 3% Unemployment 2 terms -- The Roaring 20's

1929-1940: Massive, unprecedented government Jihad on the Free Enterprise. Worst economy in human history, worse than the 7 Biblical lean Years

Jesus, CF, Does being that stupid hurt? There have been many times with little unemployment. And when that is the case, no intervention is required. But when things go crazy, as they did in 1929, in what has become known as the Great Republican Depression of 1929, you have two options. 1. Do something about it. Or, 2. Do nothing about it annd watch a depression occur. Worst unemployment in US history.
Then, as a republican troll, blame it on the president you hand the shit over to. Do not try to understand anything, because you are too stupid. And complain about the fastest recovery in US history.

Then, as a con troll, continue to blame those not in office when it happened, and prove you are butt stupid.
got it. You are butt stupid, and incapable of rational conversation. You are indeed incapable of thought. I have an econ degree. You would be laughed out. You want to start a new econ agenda. Try Regent University. It would like your delusion.

FDR's first two terms were total failure even after spending the equivalent of $3 Trillion dollars. The failure was FDR's, not the economy's

So you say As a congenital idiot and a con troll, no one believes anything you have to say. Except Ed B. who is the resident troll. But, hell, between the two of you your combined income may reach 90. Though I doubt it.
Please, tell me why you have sufficient credentials to cause me to listen to anything you say.

Here is what the experts on 1933 and the following years had to say.
"in 1933, 25 percent of all workers and 37 percent of all nonfarm workers were completely out of work. Some people starved; many others lost their farms and homes. Homeless vagabonds sneaked aboard the freight trains that crossed the nation. Dispossessed cotton farmers, the “Okies,” stuffed their possessions into dilapidated Model Ts and migrated to California in the false hope that the posters about plentiful jobs were true."
Great Depression: The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics | Library of Economics and Liberty

Now, as a con troll, I am sure you have some lies you would like to use. But those with reasoning minds know how bad it was. The maximum ue rate of 25% was in 1933, when republican congress and president handed over their mess to FDR. Eight years later, the Recession had been eliminated. But not by republicans. By Dems. Only dems. All republicans did was complain that cleaning up the mess, which was truly their mess, was taking too long. Just like con trolls today. Dipshits.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Jake, thinks he's clever but he's in way over his pointy head.

I know it.

He knows it.

He's trying to tell us 2 terms of 20% Unemployment is superior to 2 terms of 3% UE.

I am telling you what did not hurt the economy in 1921 severely hurt it in 1936 and 1937, because the situations were different. Frank cannot think clearly.

Jake,

1920-21: No government intervention. 3% Unemployment 2 terms -- The Roaring 20's

1929-1940: Massive, unprecedented government Jihad on the Free Enterprise. Worst economy in human history, worse than the 7 Biblical lean Years

Jesus, CF, Does being that stupid hurt? There have been many times with little unemployment. And when that is the case, no intervention is required. But when things go crazy, as they did in 1929, in what has become known as the Great Republican Depression of 1929, you have two options. 1. Do something about it. Or, 2. Do nothing about it annd watch a depression occur. Worst unemployment in US history.
Then, as a republican troll, blame it on the president you hand the shit over to. Do not try to understand anything, because you are too stupid. And complain about the fastest recovery in US history.

Then, as a con troll, continue to blame those not in office when it happened, and prove you are butt stupid.
got it. You are butt stupid, and incapable of rational conversation. You are indeed incapable of thought. I have an econ degree. You would be laughed out. You want to start a new econ agenda. Try Regent University. It would like your delusion.

FDR's first two terms were total failure even after spending the equivalent of $3 Trillion dollars. The failure was FDR's, not the economy's

So you say As a congenital idiot and a con troll, no one believes anything you have to say. Except Ed B. who is the resident troll. But, hell, between the two of you your combined income may reach 90. Though I doubt it.
Please, tell me why you have sufficient credentials to cause me to listen to anything you say.

Here is what the experts on 1933 and the following years had to say.
"in 1933, 25 percent of all workers and 37 percent of all nonfarm workers were completely out of work. Some people starved; many others lost their farms and homes. Homeless vagabonds sneaked aboard the freight trains that crossed the nation. Dispossessed cotton farmers, the “Okies,” stuffed their possessions into dilapidated Model Ts and migrated to California in the false hope that the posters about plentiful jobs were true."
Great Depression: The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics | Library of Economics and Liberty

Now, as a con troll, I am sure you have some lies you would like to use. But those with reasoning minds know how bad it was. The maximum ue rate of 25% was in 1933, when republican congress and president handed over their mess to FDR. Eight years later, the Recession had been eliminated. But not by republicans. By Dems. Only dems. All republicans did was complain that cleaning up the mess, which was truly their mess, was taking too long. Just like con trolls today. Dipshits.

Defending the indefensible makes you say silly things.

1933 was bad, and so was every subsequent year until 1941

It was a bad economy for 2 term, but FDR was great

Hmmmmmkay

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

. Eight years later, the Recession had been eliminated. .

1) Depression did not end till the day the evil man died!! Capitalism would have ended it in one year and prevented it in the first place.

2) Here's what Henry Morgenthau, FDR's Secretary of the Treasury (the man who desperately needed the New Deal to succeed as much as Roosevelt) said about the New Deal stimulus: "We have tried spending money.We are spending more than we ever have spent before and it does not work... We have never made good on our promises...I say after eight years of this administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started... And an enormous debt to boot!"

"The New Republic"( at the time a FDR greatest supporter") noted. In June 1939, the federal public works programs still supported almost 19 million people, nearly 15% of the population" [page 313]

In fact in 1939, unemployment was at 17%, and there were 11 million additional in stimulus make work welfare jobs. Today when the population is 2.5 times greater we have only 8 million unemployed. Conclusion: legislation to make Democrats illegal
is urgently needed

 

[Rshermr]

Frank, the socio-economic-geopolitical situations were different. Do you understand?

You cannot critically think, can you?

You are guilty of a fallacy of false equivalences. The situations are different not equivalent.

Jake, stop pretending.

Just, stop.

You're making a mockery of yourself, I mean more so than usual

Says the guy with no background, the guy who just posts con talking points. And then wants you to respect his drivel. Poor ignorant con troll.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Frank, the socio-economic-geopolitical situations were different. Do you understand?

You cannot critically think, can you?

You are guilty of a fallacy of false equivalences. The situations are different not equivalent.

Jake, stop pretending.

Just, stop.

You're making a mockery of yourself, I mean more so than usual

Says the guy with no background, the guy who just posts con talking points. And then wants you to respect his drivel. Poor ignorant con troll.

You sound like a Starkey sock and just as ignorant

 

[Markle]

Frank wants to pretend that economic conditions of 1921 (a booming consumer driven economy driven by demand after the WWI restrictions and two year need to retool the factories). None of that existed in 1936 and 1937: quite the opposite. No booming consumer driven economy existed, UE was high, then the conservative economic legislation from Congress dried up incentives by business to hire and produce.

Frank is almost there, just a few more steps.

How do you say 1921 was a booming economy when it was part of the 1920-1921 Depression? Resolved quickly by the Republican President by doing nothing.

Why would you be so fond of a president, FDR, when he extended the Great Depression by SEVEN YEARS? Then, Americans were so frightened by his repeated terms that congress passed the 22nd Amendment which was quickly ratified by the states.

 

[Markle]

Frank, the socio-economic-geopolitical situations were different. Do you understand?

You cannot critically think, can you?

You are guilty of a fallacy of false equivalences. The situations are different not equivalent.

If you're talking about CrusaderFrank, he's 100% correct about the difference between the two depressions.

Any further questions?

 

[Rshermr]

I am telling you what did not hurt the economy in 1921 severely hurt it in 1936 and 1937, because the situations were different. Frank cannot think clearly.

Jake,

1920-21: No government intervention. 3% Unemployment 2 terms -- The Roaring 20's

1929-1940: Massive, unprecedented government Jihad on the Free Enterprise. Worst economy in human history, worse than the 7 Biblical lean Years

Jesus, CF, Does being that stupid hurt? There have been many times with little unemployment. And when that is the case, no intervention is required. But when things go crazy, as they did in 1929, in what has become known as the Great Republican Depression of 1929, you have two options. 1. Do something about it. Or, 2. Do nothing about it annd watch a depression occur. Worst unemployment in US history.
Then, as a republican troll, blame it on the president you hand the shit over to. Do not try to understand anything, because you are too stupid. And complain about the fastest recovery in US history.

Then, as a con troll, continue to blame those not in office when it happened, and prove you are butt stupid.
got it. You are butt stupid, and incapable of rational conversation. You are indeed incapable of thought. I have an econ degree. You would be laughed out. You want to start a new econ agenda. Try Regent University. It would like your delusion.

FDR's first two terms were total failure even after spending the equivalent of $3 Trillion dollars. The failure was FDR's, not the economy's

So you say As a congenital idiot and a con troll, no one believes anything you have to say. Except Ed B. who is the resident troll. But, hell, between the two of you your combined income may reach 90. Though I doubt it.
Please, tell me why you have sufficient credentials to cause me to listen to anything you say.

Here is what the experts on 1933 and the following years had to say.
"in 1933, 25 percent of all workers and 37 percent of all nonfarm workers were completely out of work. Some people starved; many others lost their farms and homes. Homeless vagabonds sneaked aboard the freight trains that crossed the nation. Dispossessed cotton farmers, the “Okies,” stuffed their possessions into dilapidated Model Ts and migrated to California in the false hope that the posters about plentiful jobs were true."
Great Depression: The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics | Library of Economics and Liberty

Now, as a con troll, I am sure you have some lies you would like to use. But those with reasoning minds know how bad it was. The maximum ue rate of 25% was in 1933, when republican congress and president handed over their mess to FDR. Eight years later, the Recession had been eliminated. But not by republicans. By Dems. Only dems. All republicans did was complain that cleaning up the mess, which was truly their mess, was taking too long. Just like con trolls today. Dipshits.

Defending the indefensible makes you say silly things.
Yes, Indeed. You do say silly things, me boy. Like the great republican depression of 1929 was not the republicans fault.

1933 was bad, and so was every subsequent year until 1941
Now, the truth is the years from 1929 to 1933 were AWFUL, not just bad. Going from 3% unemploymet to 25% unemployment was AWFULL. And all underrepublican presidents and congress.
You forgot about the fact that people were starving, and repubs did nothing about their escalating depression.
But 1933 until 1941 saw efforts, and successful ones, to help people. And an end to the Great Republican Depression was a very good thing. And the fastest recovery in unemployment per year, with absolutely no help from Republicans, was a very good thing. Great years by FDR fixing the mess made by republicans.

It was a bad economy for 2 term, but FDR was great
FDR was a great president for cleaning up the worst depression on history, made entirely by republicans. Republicans made a terrible economy and required a democrat fix it. thanks for the reminder.

Hmmmmmkay

 

[Rshermr]

Frank, the socio-economic-geopolitical situations were different. Do you understand?

You cannot critically think, can you?

You are guilty of a fallacy of false equivalences. The situations are different not equivalent.

Jake, stop pretending.

Just, stop.

You're making a mockery of yourself, I mean more so than usual

Says the guy with no background, the guy who just posts con talking points. And then wants you to respect his drivel. Poor ignorant con troll.

You sound like a Starkey sock and just as ignorant

That would be the opinion of a con troll with no understanding of economics. Your opinion, me boy. And you must know how much your opinion hurts my feelings. Dipshit.

 

[Rshermr]

Frank, the socio-economic-geopolitical situations were different. Do you understand?

You cannot critically think, can you?

You are guilty of a fallacy of false equivalences. The situations are different not equivalent.

If you're talking about CrusaderFrank, he's 100% correct about the difference between the two depressions.

Any further questions?

Uh, he has no idea of any difference between one depression and a part of another that he called a separate one. Because, me boy, he is about as stupid as you.
Further questions? Yes, does it hurt to be as stupid as you are?

 

[Markle]

Here is the proof about the FDR failure. Not that any Progressives are either interested or will believe anything.

FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate

By Meg Sullivan August 10, 2004

Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

[…]

"We found that a relapse isn't likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies."

[…]

"We show that they really did artificially inflate wages and prices."

[…]

"Ironically, our work shows that the recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened."


FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate

Does the sentence about a relapse remind you of anything...recent? Like Lame Duck President Barack Hussein Obama's policies for the past 7 1/2 years?

 

[WheelieAddict]

Poor PropagandaChic is relegated to trying to denigrate a president from the 1940's. Mental illness likely explains her obsession with FDR one of our best presidents.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Frank, the socio-economic-geopolitical situations were different. Do you understand?

You cannot critically think, can you?

You are guilty of a fallacy of false equivalences. The situations are different not equivalent.

Jake, stop pretending. Just, stop. You're making a mockery of yourself, I mean more so than usual

I can't pretend you know what you are talking about.

Show us how the situations were the same: you can't, you lose.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies" is merely opinion without evidence. By 1935 the UE was coming down, then the pres and congress enacted conservative economic legislation that gummed up the recovery.

 

[WheelieAddict]

FDR's policies = 35 years of prosperity. FDR's policies deregulated in the 80s early 90s = 2008 financial crash, where of course businesses and banks were bailed out, not people. Socialism for the banks!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Frank, the socio-economic-geopolitical situations were different. Do you understand?

You cannot critically think, can you?

You are guilty of a fallacy of false equivalences. The situations are different not equivalent.

Jake, stop pretending.

Just, stop.

You're making a mockery of yourself, I mean more so than usual

Says the guy with no background, the guy who just posts con talking points. And then wants you to respect his drivel. Poor ignorant con troll.

You sound like a Starkey sock and just as ignorant

That would be the opinion of a con troll with no understanding of economics. Your opinion, me boy. And you must know how much your opinion hurts my feelings. Dipshit.

You're clearly a sock and like Starkey, in a field you don't understand