Roosevelt: His Bankrupt Policies

[CrusaderFrank]

Nonsense, Frank, you were touting economic conservative legislation and now you are touting free market and conservative legislation in the first case and completing ignoring the legislation in the second place. Hoover certainly did not abhor free markets (absolute lie) and neither did Roosevelt. Why did the legislation fail in 1936 and 1937. Because the situations were diffeerent?

You are on the run, podjo.

Jake, I'm not so mean spirited as to continue to embarrass you. You made up the concept that the legislation in "1921 legislation slowed down the expansion" and somehow tanked FDR's non existent recovery in 1936-7 I could not find one single source on Google that agreed with your bizzaroland ideas about 1921. Stick with topics you know

Frank has

(1) conceded his defeat in this discussion

(2) failed in his implication that the economic legislation in both eras did not affect the expansion of 1922 or the recovery of 1936, 1937

(3) refused to explain the differences in politics, economics, and business in the two eras

(4) by jumping from assertion to conclusion by completely ignoring #3 though asked for that explanation at least half a dozen times

He has been pwnd and his OP fail.

The mods can close the thread in response to Frank's final statement.

"Debating" Jake is like....

Jake tells us the 1921 and 1936 recessions were dramatically different without telling us why, tells us that the 1921 legislation hampered growth, something literally no one else on the planet agrees with; far more people agree that the Moon may be a hollow, artificial body, than agree with Starkey's marcoeconomic thoughts. So, what does he do?

Riiiight

Knock over the pieces and declare victory

Google

No results found for "1921 legislation slowed down the expansion".

Google

Hollow Moon About 732,000 results (0.39 seconds)

 

[JakeStarkey]

Lying does not help you, Frank.

I did explain why they were different several times, and you never responded to that. Ever.

Why?

You can't without losing the OP.

 

[Rshermr]

Lying does not help you, Frank.

I did explain why they were different several times, and you never responded to that. Ever.

Why?

You can't without losing the OP

[/QUOTE]

I had the same experience. Poor clown just picks and chooses which bat shit crazy con talking point he wants to lie about. Poor guy. Must be like shit to live that way. But the thing is, con trolls love shit.
First he tries to use the old con talking point that the 1936 through 1927 downturn was a separate recession. Which it was not. And all rational people know why the downturn occurred and how FDR fixed the problem. Only cons lie about this one, and the talking point is out there in nearly every bat shit crazy con web site that exists.
But the really funny thing is that he has no idea of the different types of recessions that exist, and what either one was. Poor ignorant troll.

 

[Markle]

"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.

Not true. There is plenty of evidence. They studied the entire Great Depression so there was ample evidence.

For more evidence, see what happened after the housing/mortgage/financial meltdown and notice that by Lame Duck President Barack Hussein futile efforts, we are still without a single year of growth greater than 3% a year. A first in history.

 

[Markle]

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!

Thirty-five years of prosperity? You're quite amusing.

2001 Recession
It lasted eight months (March-November 2001). It was caused by the Y2K scare, which created aboom and subsequent bust in Internet businesses. It was aggravated by the 9/11 attack. The economy contracted in two quarters: Q1 -1.1% (-0.5%) and Q3 -1.3% (-1.4%). Unemploymentreached 5.7% during the recession, but rose even further to 6% in June 2003. This often happens in recessions, as unemployment is a lagging indicator. Most employers wait until they are sure the economy is back on its feet again before hiring permanent employees.

1990-1991 Recession
This recession was eight months (July 1990 to March 1991). It was caused by the Savings and Loan Crisis in 1989. GDP was -3.4% (-3.0%) in Q4 1990 and -1.9% (-2.0%) in Q1 1991.

1980-1982 Recession
This was technically two recessions: the first six months of 1980 and 16 months from July 1981 - November 1982. It was partially caused by the Iranian oil embargo, which reduced U.S. oil supplies driving up prices. The Fed raised interest rates to combat inflation, reducing business spending. GDP was negative for six of the 12 quarters. The worst was Q2 1980 at -7.9% (-7.8%), the worst quarterly decline since the Great Depression (until the 2008-2009 recession). In Q1 1982, it was nearly as bad, plummeting 6.5%. Unemployment rose to 10.8% in November 1982, the highest level of unemployment in any recession. It was above 10% for 10 months. President Reagan ended it by lowering the tax rate and boosting the defense budget.

1973-1975 Recession
This recession lasted sixteen months (November 1973-March 1975). OPEC is blamed for quadrupling oil prices, but the OPEC oil embargo alone didn't cause such a deep recession. Several factors contributed. First, President Nixon instituted wage-price controls. This kept prices too high, reducing demand. Wage controls made salaries too high, which forced businesses to lay off workers. Second, Nixon took the U.S. off of the gold standard in response to a run on the gold held at Fort Knox. That created inflation, as the price of gold skyrocketed to $120 an ounce and the dollar's value plummeted. The result was stagflation and three consecutive quarters of negativeGDP growth: 1974 Q3 -3.8% (-3.8%), Q4 -1.6% (-1.6%), 1975 Q1 -4.7%(-4.7%). Unemployment reached a peak of 9% in May 1975, two months after the recession technically ended.

1970 Recession
This recession was relatively mild, lasting 11 months. GDP was down for two quarters: Q1 -0.7% and Q4 -4.0%. Unemployment peaked at 6.1% in December 1970.

1960 Recession
Starting in April 1960, the recession lasted 10 months. GDP was -1.5% (-2%) in Q2 and -4.8% (-5.1%) in Q4. Unemployment reached a peak of 7.1% in May 1961. President Kennedy ended the recession with stimulus spending. His opponent, Richard Nixon, said the recession cost him the election. That's because he had been Vice-President and was blamed for causing it.

Recession of 1957
It was eight months (August 1957-April 1958). GDP was - 4.0% in Q4 1957. It immediately plummeted 10.0% in Q1 1958. Unemployment didn't reach its peak of 7.1% until September 1958. It was caused by contractionary monetary policy.

Recession of 1953
Beginning July 1953, this recession lasted 10 months, a result of the end of the Korean War. Unemployment didn't reach its peak of 6.1% until September 1954, four months after the recession ended. GDP contracted 2.25 in Q3, 5.9% in Q4, and 1.8% in Q1 1954.

1949 Recession
This 11 month recession began in November 1948 and lasted until October 1949, when unemployment reached a peak of 7.9%. GDP fell .5% for the year. This was another natural down cycle, caused by the economy adjusting to peace-time production.

1945 Recession
This recession lasted only eight months, between February and October 1945. However, it seemed to last longer, since GDP plummeted 10.6% in 1946. This was a natural result of the demobilization from WWII, as the huge demand for military weapons were no longer needed. Government spending dropped, although business spending was robust. (Source: NBER, Business Cycle Expansions and Contractions)

11 Recessions Since the Great Depression

 

[Markle]

Quit stuttering. You cannot explain why the economic legislation in 1921 worked (that's your point, not mine) and why it failed in 1936 and 1937.

That's the crux of the discussion, and you keep failing to explain "why".

I can't help it if you don't know how to use Google.

There was no legislation the Republicans did nothing and the depression ended on its own. Unlike the muckup made by FDR and his numerous failed efforts.

 

[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!

Thirty-five years of prosperity? You're quite amusing.

2001 Recession
It lasted eight months (March-November 2001). It was caused by the Y2K scare, which created aboom and subsequent bust in Internet businesses. It was aggravated by the 9/11 attack. The economy contracted in two quarters: Q1 -1.1% (-0.5%) and Q3 -1.3% (-1.4%). Unemploymentreached 5.7% during the recession, but rose even further to 6% in June 2003. This often happens in recessions, as unemployment is a lagging indicator. Most employers wait until they are sure the economy is back on its feet again before hiring permanent employees.

1990-1991 Recession
This recession was eight months (July 1990 to March 1991). It was caused by the Savings and Loan Crisis in 1989. GDP was -3.4% (-3.0%) in Q4 1990 and -1.9% (-2.0%) in Q1 1991.

1980-1982 Recession
This was technically two recessions: the first six months of 1980 and 16 months from July 1981 - November 1982. It was partially caused by the Iranian oil embargo, which reduced U.S. oil supplies driving up prices. The Fed raised interest rates to combat inflation, reducing business spending. GDP was negative for six of the 12 quarters. The worst was Q2 1980 at -7.9% (-7.8%), the worst quarterly decline since the Great Depression (until the 2008-2009 recession). In Q1 1982, it was nearly as bad, plummeting 6.5%. Unemployment rose to 10.8% in November 1982, the highest level of unemployment in any recession. It was above 10% for 10 months. President Reagan ended it by lowering the tax rate and boosting the defense budget.

1973-1975 Recession
This recession lasted sixteen months (November 1973-March 1975). OPEC is blamed for quadrupling oil prices, but the OPEC oil embargo alone didn't cause such a deep recession. Several factors contributed. First, President Nixon instituted wage-price controls. This kept prices too high, reducing demand. Wage controls made salaries too high, which forced businesses to lay off workers. Second, Nixon took the U.S. off of the gold standard in response to a run on the gold held at Fort Knox. That created inflation, as the price of gold skyrocketed to $120 an ounce and the dollar's value plummeted. The result was stagflation and three consecutive quarters of negativeGDP growth: 1974 Q3 -3.8% (-3.8%), Q4 -1.6% (-1.6%), 1975 Q1 -4.7%(-4.7%). Unemployment reached a peak of 9% in May 1975, two months after the recession technically ended.

1970 Recession
This recession was relatively mild, lasting 11 months. GDP was down for two quarters: Q1 -0.7% and Q4 -4.0%. Unemployment peaked at 6.1% in December 1970.

1960 Recession
Starting in April 1960, the recession lasted 10 months. GDP was -1.5% (-2%) in Q2 and -4.8% (-5.1%) in Q4. Unemployment reached a peak of 7.1% in May 1961. President Kennedy ended the recession with stimulus spending. His opponent, Richard Nixon, said the recession cost him the election. That's because he had been Vice-President and was blamed for causing it.

Recession of 1957
It was eight months (August 1957-April 1958). GDP was - 4.0% in Q4 1957. It immediately plummeted 10.0% in Q1 1958. Unemployment didn't reach its peak of 7.1% until September 1958. It was caused by contractionary monetary policy.

Recession of 1953
Beginning July 1953, this recession lasted 10 months, a result of the end of the Korean War. Unemployment didn't reach its peak of 6.1% until September 1954, four months after the recession ended. GDP contracted 2.25 in Q3, 5.9% in Q4, and 1.8% in Q1 1954.

1949 Recession
This 11 month recession began in November 1948 and lasted until October 1949, when unemployment reached a peak of 7.9%. GDP fell .5% for the year. This was another natural down cycle, caused by the economy adjusting to peace-time production.

1945 Recession
This recession lasted only eight months, between February and October 1945. However, it seemed to last longer, since GDP plummeted 10.6% in 1946. This was a natural result of the demobilization from WWII, as the huge demand for military weapons were no longer needed. Government spending dropped, although business spending was robust. (Source: NBER, Business Cycle Expansions and Contractions)

11 Recessions Since the Great Depression

That you think when I say prosperity I mean "everything is perfect" is amusing as well. The nature of Capitalism includes dips and peaks. Capitalism is the best system IMO but it is not perfect as there is no perfect system. That is why some regulations are needed to rein it in and try to keep the dips and peeks as small as possible. The dips of the depression and 2008 were very big and the common factor with both was too much deregulation beforehand. Roosevelt spearheaded policies that lessened the dips and peeks substantially and worked for a long period. It can be argued that some went to far but most were effective and needed. Of course they aren't perfect but nothing is. Hell look up Teddy Roosevelt a Republican who understood what I am saying and also spearheaded policies that did a lot of good for the economy.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Quit stuttering. You cannot explain why the economic legislation in 1921 worked (that's your point, not mine) and why it failed in 1936 and 1937.

That's the crux of the discussion, and you keep failing to explain "why".

I can't help it if you don't know how to use Google.

There was no legislation the Republicans did nothing and the depression ended on its own. Unlike the muckup made by FDR and his numerous failed efforts.

You cannot support the first statement.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Listening to Starkey and Rshemer discussing economics is like listening to them reading poetry in a foreign language that they can't speak or understand.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Listening to Starkey and Rshemer discussing economics is like listening to them reading poetry in a foreign language that they can't speak or understand.

Frank, having been severely and correctly rebuked for his lack of understanding of economics and the Great Depression, responds, like any loser, with personal insults.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Listening to Starkey and Rshemer discussing economics is like listening to them reading poetry in a foreign language that they can't speak or understand.

Frank, having been severely and correctly rebuked for his lack of understanding of economics and the Great Depression, responds, like any loser, with personal insults.

Jake on marco is like him trying to sing the role of Don Giovanni and not beaing able to carry a tune or speak or understand a single word of Italian. Good grief, who else puts out an idea that literally nobody on the entire planet agrees with?

Google

No results found for "1921 legislation slowed down the expansion".

 

[JakeStarkey]

Listening to Starkey and Rshemer discussing economics is like listening to them reading poetry in a foreign language that they can't speak or understand.

Frank, having been severely and correctly rebuked for his lack of understanding of economics and the Great Depression, responds, like any loser, with personal insults.

Jake on marco is like him trying to sing the role of Don Giovanni and not beaing able to carry a tune or speak or understand a single word of Italian. Good grief, who else puts out an idea that literally nobody on the entire planet agrees with? Google No results found for "1921 legislation slowed down the expansion".

That you can't do your own research other than google reveals your limitations not mine. Your continued personal insults reveal that you have not understand your own OP.

The situations in the early twenties and the mid-thirties. You can't explain the differences. You simply ignore them. You insist one form fits all.

How do you explain the economic conservative legislation retarding the recovery in the mid-thirties? You simply point at final numbers and say "see" as if that means anything without analysis.

 

[Rshermr]

Listening to Starkey and Rshemer discussing economics is like listening to them reading poetry in a foreign language that they can't speak or understand.

Frank, having been severely and correctly rebuked for his lack of understanding of economics and the Great Depression, responds, like any loser, with personal insults.

Jake on marco is like him trying to sing the role of Don Giovanni and not beaing able to carry a tune or speak or understand a single word of Italian. Good grief, who else puts out an idea that literally nobody on the entire planet agrees with?

Google

No results found for "1921 legislation slowed down the expansion".

Have you noticed that no one is paying attention to your worthless posts. But it is nice that you have given up the brain dead attempts to compare two completely different economic downturns to each other. Because you at least know you can not win that argument. Even a con troll like yourself has to allow a little bit of unassailable truth through.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Listening to Starkey and Rshemer discussing economics is like listening to them reading poetry in a foreign language that they can't speak or understand.

Frank, having been severely and correctly rebuked for his lack of understanding of economics and the Great Depression, responds, like any loser, with personal insults.

Jake on marco is like him trying to sing the role of Don Giovanni and not beaing able to carry a tune or speak or understand a single word of Italian. Good grief, who else puts out an idea that literally nobody on the entire planet agrees with? Google No results found for "1921 legislation slowed down the expansion".

That you can't do your own research other than google reveals your limitations not mine. Your continued personal insults reveal that you have not understand your own OP.

The situations in the early twenties and the mid-thirties. You can't explain the differences. You simply ignore them. You insist one form fits all.

How do you explain the economic conservative legislation retarding the recovery in the mid-thirties? You simply point at final numbers and say "see" as if that means anything without analysis.

Jake, I researched your made up idea that "1921 legislation slowing expansion" and I knew it was totally made up on the spot. It's like saying "the force of gravity repels objects with mass"

Why you feel the need to keep highlighting your ignorance is just beyond me

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Listening to Starkey and Rshemer discussing economics is like listening to them reading poetry in a foreign language that they can't speak or understand.

Frank, having been severely and correctly rebuked for his lack of understanding of economics and the Great Depression, responds, like any loser, with personal insults.

Jake on marco is like him trying to sing the role of Don Giovanni and not beaing able to carry a tune or speak or understand a single word of Italian. Good grief, who else puts out an idea that literally nobody on the entire planet agrees with?

Google

No results found for "1921 legislation slowed down the expansion".

Have you noticed that no one is paying attention to your worthless posts. But it is nice that you have given up the brain dead attempts to compare two completely different economic downturns to each other. Because you at least know you can not win that argument. Even a con troll like yourself has to allow a little bit of unassailable truth through.

Jake's singing partner who also does not know the words and can't hold a tune

 

[Rshermr]

Listening to Starkey and Rshemer discussing economics is like listening to them reading poetry in a foreign language that they can't speak or understand.

Frank, having been severely and correctly rebuked for his lack of understanding of economics and the Great Depression, responds, like any loser, with personal insults.

Jake on marco is like him trying to sing the role of Don Giovanni and not beaing able to carry a tune or speak or understand a single word of Italian. Good grief, who else puts out an idea that literally nobody on the entire planet agrees with?

Google

No results found for "1921 legislation slowed down the expansion".

Have you noticed that no one is paying attention to your worthless posts. But it is nice that you have given up the brain dead attempts to compare two completely different economic downturns to each other. Because you at least know you can not win that argument. Even a con troll like yourself has to allow a little bit of unassailable truth through.

Jake's singing partner who also does not know the words and can't hold a tune

A personal attack, and about as pertinent as CF gets. Actual economic postings are not rare for CF. They are absolutely non-existent. Poor troll is completely incapable, just able to post con talking points. Sad.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Calling a poster a con, an idiot and a troll, then whining when they respond in kind....priceless

 

[Rshermr]

Calling a poster a con, an idiot and a troll, then whining when they respond in kind....priceless

Actually, I expect personal attacks from con idiots, and con trolls. So I am hardly whining, me boy. You are as suspected. So, the fact that you have no ability to support your con talking points is of no surprise, either. What is stupid, however, is you making claims and having no back up, no links, and expecting anyone to believe you. Because you have NO background, no expertise. Just posting con talking points is not of any value at all. What it is, me boy, is insulting yourself. Which fits.

 

[regent]

Do people understand that economics is a Social Science and those science are called the soft sciences, and economics may be the softest. All depressions/recessions may be caused by different factors in different quantities at different times. Some of those factors are: natural resources
trade practices
taxes
tariffs
industry
economic system
world economy
nation's plan for economic recovery
and on and on.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Do people understand that economics is a Social Science and those science are called the soft sciences, and economics may be the softest. All depressions/recessions may be caused by different factors in different quantities at different times. Some of those factors are: natural resources
trade practices
taxes
tariffs
industry
economic system
world economy
nation's plan for economic recovery
and on and on.

And it's a trio with Starkey, Rshermr and Regent who are tone deaf, can't read music, can't speak German but are singing Queen of the Night Aria



Great work not bothering to read any of the 38 prior pages