The Damage of the Depression Wasn't Economic

[ThoughtCrimes]

OP FAIL (how unusual ). I'd like to read Chica's explanation of how FDR screwed up Europe's political paradigms as those countries across the pond went through the same basic problems during the same basic time the US suffered with the depression.

 

[PoliticalChic]

6. Let's review:
Harding solved as great an economic crisis as Roosevelt's in a year or two....consistent with the history of recessions/depressions throughout the history of the nation.

Roosevelt promised to balance the budget, to cut spending....as Harding had....but he didn't follow through on the promise.




So....what really happened?

7. "Franklin Delano Roosevelt won the 1932 presidential election in a landslide, collecting 472 electoral votes to just 59 for the incumbent Herbert Hoover.

The platform of the Democratic Party, whose ticket Roosevelt headed, declared, “We believe that a party platform is a covenant with the people to be faithfully kept by the party entrusted with power.” It called for a 25 percent reduction in federal spending, a balanced federal budget, a sound gold currency “to be preserved at all hazards,” the removal of government from areas that belonged more appropriately to private enterprise and an end to the “extravagance” of Hoover’s farm programs.



This is what candidate Roosevelt promised, but it bears no resemblance to what President Roosevelt actually delivered.
In the first year of the New Deal, Roosevelt proposed spending $10 billion while revenues were only $3 billion.
Between 1933 and 1936, government expenditures rose by more than 83 percent. Federal debt skyrocketed by 73 percent."
Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed



Now...he knew how to be successful....but did the very opposite.
Why?



Here's why: he was great pals with Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler....and knew "You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before."


Not if you want to swim with the other sharks.


Hard to believe how many brain-dead indoctrinees still find this a description of "greatness."

 

[PoliticalChic]

OP FAIL (how unusual ). I'd like to read Chica's explanation of how FDR screwed up Europe's political paradigms as those countries across the pond went through the same basic problems during the same basic time the US suffered with the depression.

If only you had an education.

Let's see.

The League of Nations collected data from many nations throughout the 1930s on industrial production, unemployment, national debt, and taxes.
How did Roosevelt's United States compare with other countries?

In all four of these key indexes the United States did very poorly, almost worse than any other nation in the study.

Most European nations handled the Great Depression better than the United States.


World Economic Survey: Eighth Year, 1938/1939 (Geneva: League of Nations, 1939) p.128, quoted in "New Deal or Raw Deal?: How FDR's Economic Legacy Has Damaged America," by Burton W. Folsom Jr


So...not only did the "great" Emperor Franklin the First manage to extend and magnify the depression, but he couldn't compete with the leaders of most European nations.


"Great" seems to have developed a new definition.

 

[Camp]

6. Let's review:
Harding solved as great an economic crisis as Roosevelt's in a year or two....consistent with the history of recessions/depressions throughout the history of the nation.

Roosevelt promised to balance the budget, to cut spending....as Harding had....but he didn't follow through on the promise.




So....what really happened?

You continue to evade and deflect responding to the challenge I have given you based on my post #51. A basic and fundamental fact has been provided that proves your distortion and the premise of your thesis to be misinformed and dishonest and yet you seem unable to even attempt to respond.

Less than a year after FDR was inaugurated in March of 1933, what had been a troublesome drought became the crisis that would plague the country for the entire decade. The anti-FDR folks like to ignore Dust Bowl Storms that swept across the farmlands and ranches creating massive unemployment. The first major storm hit on Nov. 11, 1933, and was soon followed by another major storm on May 9, 1934. There is some discrepancy on the dates due to what are defined by various sources as "major". In between the major storms were a series of continuous lesser regional storms.

history.com/topics/dust-bowl

 

[PoliticalChic]

6. Let's review:
Harding solved as great an economic crisis as Roosevelt's in a year or two....consistent with the history of recessions/depressions throughout the history of the nation.

Roosevelt promised to balance the budget, to cut spending....as Harding had....but he didn't follow through on the promise.




So....what really happened?

You continue to evade and deflect responding to the challenge I have given you based on my post #51. A basic and fundamental fact has been provided that proves your distortion and the premise of your thesis to be misinformed and dishonest and yet you seem unable to even attempt to respond.

Less than a year after FDR was inaugurated in March of 1933, what had been a troublesome drought became the crisis that would plague the country for the entire decade. The anti-FDR folks like to ignore Dust Bowl Storms that swept across the farmlands and ranches creating massive unemployment. The first major storm hit on Nov. 11, 1933, and was soon followed by another major storm on May 9, 1934. There is some discrepancy on the dates due to what are defined by various sources as "major". In between the major storms were a series of continuous lesser regional storms.

history.com/topics/dust-bowl

I know you'd like to ignore the documented facts that I've provided....including Roosevelt's own words.....but try, anyway: why did he promise to cut spending, balance the budge, reduce deficits, ....
...and do the very opposite?
I gave my explanation: The reason was political: we wanted to be a dictator, like his pals Stalin and Mussolini.....

What's yours?

 

[PoliticalChic]

8. One simpleton loves to post this: "But historians say Roosevelt...greatest President ever!!!!"


Not only are the schools controlled by Leftists, socialists, Progressives, Liberals....collectivists all......
...that's who 'historians' are, too.



And the most acclaimed historians tend to be reflexively anti-capitalist and distrustful of free markets; they find Roosevelt’s exercise of power, constitutional or not, to be impressive and historically “interesting.”


In surveys, a majority consistently rank FDR near the top of the list for presidential greatness, so it is likely they would reject the notion that the New Deal was responsible for prolonging the Great Depression.
But when a nationally representative poll by the American Institute of Public Opinion in the spring of 1939 asked, “Do you think the attitude of the Roosevelt administration toward business is delaying business recovery?” the American people responded “yes” by a margin of more than 2-to-1. The business community felt even more strongly so. Robert Higgs, “Regime Uncertainty: Why the Great Depression Lasted So Long and Why Prosperity Resumed After the War,” The Independent Review, Volume I, Number 4: Spring 1997, p. 577




Whose word should we take that Roosevelt was an unmitigated failure?

a. In his private diary, FDR’s very own Treasury Secretary, Henry Morgenthau, seemed to agree. He wrote: “We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever 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!” John Morton Blum, From the Morgenthau Diaries: Years of Crisis, 1928-1938, ppg. 24-25



At the end of the decade and 12 years after the stock market crash of Black Thursday, 10 million Americans were jobless. The unemployment rate was in excess of 17 percent. Roosevelt had pledged in 1932 to end the crisis, but it persisted two presidential terms and countless interventions later.



"But historians say Roosevelt...greatest President ever!!!!"
Really????

 

[Camp]

6. Let's review:
Harding solved as great an economic crisis as Roosevelt's in a year or two....consistent with the history of recessions/depressions throughout the history of the nation.

Roosevelt promised to balance the budget, to cut spending....as Harding had....but he didn't follow through on the promise.




So....what really happened?

You continue to evade and deflect responding to the challenge I have given you based on my post #51. A basic and fundamental fact has been provided that proves your distortion and the premise of your thesis to be misinformed and dishonest and yet you seem unable to even attempt to respond.

Less than a year after FDR was inaugurated in March of 1933, what had been a troublesome drought became the crisis that would plague the country for the entire decade. The anti-FDR folks like to ignore Dust Bowl Storms that swept across the farmlands and ranches creating massive unemployment. The first major storm hit on Nov. 11, 1933, and was soon followed by another major storm on May 9, 1934. There is some discrepancy on the dates due to what are defined by various sources as "major". In between the major storms were a series of continuous lesser regional storms.

history.com/topics/dust-bowl

I know you'd like to ignore the documented facts that I've provided....including Roosevelt's own words.....but try, anyway: why did he promise to cut spending, balance the budge, reduce deficits, ....
...and do the very opposite?
I gave my explanation: The reason was political: we wanted to be a dictator, like his pals Stalin and Mussolini.....

What's yours?

I am not ignoring anything. I have challenged some of your major and primary alleged facts as being distorted and dishonest. Instead of answering you simply answer my questions with new questions of your own. I just gave you an answer with a link to show the drastic change that occurred less than a year after FDR was inaugurated. You will not respond to the claim that the Dust Bowl Storms crippled the countries major industry, agriculture and make pretend like the Dust Bowl crisis was irrelevant. You have been given a very specific answer to your question. Why do you continue to ask the same question and ignore the answer you have been given?

 

[PoliticalChic]

6. Let's review:
Harding solved as great an economic crisis as Roosevelt's in a year or two....consistent with the history of recessions/depressions throughout the history of the nation.

Roosevelt promised to balance the budget, to cut spending....as Harding had....but he didn't follow through on the promise.




So....what really happened?

You continue to evade and deflect responding to the challenge I have given you based on my post #51. A basic and fundamental fact has been provided that proves your distortion and the premise of your thesis to be misinformed and dishonest and yet you seem unable to even attempt to respond.

Less than a year after FDR was inaugurated in March of 1933, what had been a troublesome drought became the crisis that would plague the country for the entire decade. The anti-FDR folks like to ignore Dust Bowl Storms that swept across the farmlands and ranches creating massive unemployment. The first major storm hit on Nov. 11, 1933, and was soon followed by another major storm on May 9, 1934. There is some discrepancy on the dates due to what are defined by various sources as "major". In between the major storms were a series of continuous lesser regional storms.

history.com/topics/dust-bowl

I know you'd like to ignore the documented facts that I've provided....including Roosevelt's own words.....but try, anyway: why did he promise to cut spending, balance the budge, reduce deficits, ....
...and do the very opposite?
I gave my explanation: The reason was political: we wanted to be a dictator, like his pals Stalin and Mussolini.....

What's yours?

I am not ignoring anything. I have challenged some of your major and primary alleged facts as being distorted and dishonest. Instead of answering you simply answer my questions with new questions of your own. I just gave you an answer with a link to show the drastic change that occurred less than a year after FDR was inaugurated. You will not respond to the claim that the Dust Bowl Storms crippled the countries major industry, agriculture and make pretend like the Dust Bowl crisis was irrelevant. You have been given a very specific answer to your question. Why do you continue to ask the same question and ignore the answer you have been given?

Had nothing to do with Roosevelt's infamy.

Hoover doled out hundreds of millions of dollars to wheat and cotton farmers even as the new tariffs wiped out their markets.

The FDR administration also paid farmers for the first time for not working at all. Even if the AAA had helped farmers by curtailing supplies 17 18 and raising prices, it could have done so only by hurting millions of others who had to pay those prices or make do with less to eat.
Hans F. Sennholz, “The Great Depression,” The Freeman, April 1975, p. 210

And...
From The Liberal Tradition: A Free People and a Free Economy by Lewis W. Douglas, as quoted in “Monetary Central Planning and the State, Part XIV: The New Deal and Its Critics,” by Richard M. Ebeling in Freedom Daily, February 1998, p. 12.



I love showing what a Roosevelt apologist you are.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

OP FAIL (how unusual ). I'd like to read Chica's explanation of how FDR screwed up Europe's political paradigms as those countries across the pond went through the same basic problems during the same basic time the US suffered with the depression.

If only you had an education.

Let's see.

The League of Nations collected data from many nations throughout the 1930s on industrial production, unemployment, national debt, and taxes.
How did Roosevelt's United States compare with other countries?

In all four of these key indexes the United States did very poorly, almost worse than any other nation in the study.

Most European nations handled the Great Depression better than the United States.


World Economic Survey: Eighth Year, 1938/1939 (Geneva: League of Nations, 1939) p.128, quoted in "New Deal or Raw Deal?: How FDR's Economic Legacy Has Damaged America," by Burton W. Folsom Jr


So...not only did the "great" Emperor Franklin the First manage to extend and magnify the depression, but he couldn't compete with the leaders of most European nations.


"Great" seems to have developed a new definition.

Who cares about you apples and oranges statistical comparisons, one nation to another for that period? It seems you're only good at producing the straw man to deflect from an accurate, lucid and cogent response. That was not the premise of your OP, twit!

I reminded ALL that the US was not alone in the problem and that it was an economic problem. Your claim that the depression as experienced in the US, in your words, "The Damage of the Depression Wasn't Economic... it was political!" are just plain wrong and revisionist! To claim the that the major issue Americans faced during the depression, like my own father, was political and not economic is bloody STUPID AND IGNORANT!!!!

That sophistry just don't get off the ground, Chica, and no amount of revisionist claptrap can change the true historical record!

 

[PoliticalChic]

OP FAIL (how unusual ). I'd like to read Chica's explanation of how FDR screwed up Europe's political paradigms as those countries across the pond went through the same basic problems during the same basic time the US suffered with the depression.

If only you had an education.

Let's see.

The League of Nations collected data from many nations throughout the 1930s on industrial production, unemployment, national debt, and taxes.
How did Roosevelt's United States compare with other countries?

In all four of these key indexes the United States did very poorly, almost worse than any other nation in the study.

Most European nations handled the Great Depression better than the United States.


World Economic Survey: Eighth Year, 1938/1939 (Geneva: League of Nations, 1939) p.128, quoted in "New Deal or Raw Deal?: How FDR's Economic Legacy Has Damaged America," by Burton W. Folsom Jr


So...not only did the "great" Emperor Franklin the First manage to extend and magnify the depression, but he couldn't compete with the leaders of most European nations.


"Great" seems to have developed a new definition.

Who cares about you apples and oranges statistical comparisons, one nation to another for that period? It seems you're only good at producing the straw man to deflect from an accurate, lucid and cogent response. That was not the premise of your OP, twit!

I reminded ALL that the US was not alone in the problem and that it was an economic problem. Your claim that the depression as experienced in the US, in your words, "The Damage of the Depression Wasn't Economic... it was political!" are just plain wrong and revisionist! To claim the that the major issue Americans faced during the depression, like my own father, was political and not economic is bloody STUPID AND IGNORANT!!!!

That sophistry just don't get off the ground, Chica, and no amount of revisionist claptrap can change the true historical record!

Wasn't that great....today I rammed your lying words right down your throat...

...and, was it yesterday, that I corrected your potty mouth.

What a typical Liberal you are, huh?

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

OP FAIL (how unusual ). I'd like to read Chica's explanation of how FDR screwed up Europe's political paradigms as those countries across the pond went through the same basic problems during the same basic time the US suffered with the depression.

If only you had an education.

Let's see.

The League of Nations collected data from many nations throughout the 1930s on industrial production, unemployment, national debt, and taxes.
How did Roosevelt's United States compare with other countries?

In all four of these key indexes the United States did very poorly, almost worse than any other nation in the study.

Most European nations handled the Great Depression better than the United States.


World Economic Survey: Eighth Year, 1938/1939 (Geneva: League of Nations, 1939) p.128, quoted in "New Deal or Raw Deal?: How FDR's Economic Legacy Has Damaged America," by Burton W. Folsom Jr


So...not only did the "great" Emperor Franklin the First manage to extend and magnify the depression, but he couldn't compete with the leaders of most European nations.


"Great" seems to have developed a new definition.

Who cares about you apples and oranges statistical comparisons, one nation to another for that period? It seems you're only good at producing the straw man to deflect from an accurate, lucid and cogent response. That was not the premise of your OP, twit!

I reminded ALL that the US was not alone in the problem and that it was an economic problem. Your claim that the depression as experienced in the US, in your words, "The Damage of the Depression Wasn't Economic... it was political!" are just plain wrong and revisionist! To claim the that the major issue Americans faced during the depression, like my own father, was political and not economic is bloody STUPID AND IGNORANT!!!!

That sophistry just don't get off the ground, Chica, and no amount of revisionist claptrap can change the true historical record!

Wasn't that great....today I rammed your lying words right down your throat...

...and, was it yesterday, that I corrected your potty mouth.

What a typical Liberal you are, huh?

Oh horseshit, Chica! The OP was a piece of contrived shit that only the brain dead or the sycophantic sheep of your far right Nazi faction would be capable of accepting as truth. You can't make a silk purse out of your horseshit revisionists fantasies. The OP is a FAIL, twit.

Producing a straw man is not a refutation, idiot! And I note with great amusement that you mentioned not a word of my post that obliterated the premise of your OP and your previous post, but rather you turn to ad hominem to shroud your humiliation. That's what you do every time you suffer a self-inflicted injury, Chica!

 

[PoliticalChic]

OP FAIL (how unusual ). I'd like to read Chica's explanation of how FDR screwed up Europe's political paradigms as those countries across the pond went through the same basic problems during the same basic time the US suffered with the depression.

If only you had an education.

Let's see.

The League of Nations collected data from many nations throughout the 1930s on industrial production, unemployment, national debt, and taxes.
How did Roosevelt's United States compare with other countries?

In all four of these key indexes the United States did very poorly, almost worse than any other nation in the study.

Most European nations handled the Great Depression better than the United States.


World Economic Survey: Eighth Year, 1938/1939 (Geneva: League of Nations, 1939) p.128, quoted in "New Deal or Raw Deal?: How FDR's Economic Legacy Has Damaged America," by Burton W. Folsom Jr


So...not only did the "great" Emperor Franklin the First manage to extend and magnify the depression, but he couldn't compete with the leaders of most European nations.


"Great" seems to have developed a new definition.

Who cares about you apples and oranges statistical comparisons, one nation to another for that period? It seems you're only good at producing the straw man to deflect from an accurate, lucid and cogent response. That was not the premise of your OP, twit!

I reminded ALL that the US was not alone in the problem and that it was an economic problem. Your claim that the depression as experienced in the US, in your words, "The Damage of the Depression Wasn't Economic... it was political!" are just plain wrong and revisionist! To claim the that the major issue Americans faced during the depression, like my own father, was political and not economic is bloody STUPID AND IGNORANT!!!!

That sophistry just don't get off the ground, Chica, and no amount of revisionist claptrap can change the true historical record!

Wasn't that great....today I rammed your lying words right down your throat...

...and, was it yesterday, that I corrected your potty mouth.

What a typical Liberal you are, huh?

Oh horseshit, Chica! The OP was a piece of contrived shit that only the brain dead or the sycophantic sheep of your far right Nazi faction would be capable of accepting as truth. You can't make a silk purse out of your horseshit revisionists fantasies. The OP is a FAIL, twit.

Producing a straw man is not a refutation, idiot! And I note with great amusement that you mentioned not a word of my post that obliterated the premise of your OP and your previous post, but rather you turn to ad hominem to shroud your humiliation. That's what you do every time you suffer a self-inflicted injury, Chica!

I just wanted to see how long it would take me to force you into vulgarity.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

OP FAIL (how unusual ). I'd like to read Chica's explanation of how FDR screwed up Europe's political paradigms as those countries across the pond went through the same basic problems during the same basic time the US suffered with the depression.

If only you had an education.

Let's see.

The League of Nations collected data from many nations throughout the 1930s on industrial production, unemployment, national debt, and taxes.
How did Roosevelt's United States compare with other countries?

In all four of these key indexes the United States did very poorly, almost worse than any other nation in the study.

Most European nations handled the Great Depression better than the United States.


World Economic Survey: Eighth Year, 1938/1939 (Geneva: League of Nations, 1939) p.128, quoted in "New Deal or Raw Deal?: How FDR's Economic Legacy Has Damaged America," by Burton W. Folsom Jr


So...not only did the "great" Emperor Franklin the First manage to extend and magnify the depression, but he couldn't compete with the leaders of most European nations.


"Great" seems to have developed a new definition.

Who cares about you apples and oranges statistical comparisons, one nation to another for that period? It seems you're only good at producing the straw man to deflect from an accurate, lucid and cogent response. That was not the premise of your OP, twit!

I reminded ALL that the US was not alone in the problem and that it was an economic problem. Your claim that the depression as experienced in the US, in your words, "The Damage of the Depression Wasn't Economic... it was political!" are just plain wrong and revisionist! To claim the that the major issue Americans faced during the depression, like my own father, was political and not economic is bloody STUPID AND IGNORANT!!!!

That sophistry just don't get off the ground, Chica, and no amount of revisionist claptrap can change the true historical record!

Wasn't that great....today I rammed your lying words right down your throat...

...and, was it yesterday, that I corrected your potty mouth.

What a typical Liberal you are, huh?

Oh horseshit, Chica! The OP was a piece of contrived shit that only the brain dead or the sycophantic sheep of your far right Nazi faction would be capable of accepting as truth. You can't make a silk purse out of your horseshit revisionists fantasies. The OP is a FAIL, twit.

Producing a straw man is not a refutation, idiot! And I note with great amusement that you mentioned not a word of my post that obliterated the premise of your OP and your previous post, but rather you turn to ad hominem to shroud your humiliation. That's what you do every time you suffer a self-inflicted injury, Chica!

I just wanted to see how long it would take me to force you into vulgarity.

And what does that have to do with your perfidy, you twit? I told you before, Chica, horseshit is horseshit. You don't like being called on your spreading that same manure, stop spreading it, and pretending you're so very offended by the reality that vulgarity exits most everywhere and especially in your type of lies and distortions, you narcissistic phony!

 

[imawhosure]

6. Let's review:
Harding solved as great an economic crisis as Roosevelt's in a year or two....consistent with the history of recessions/depressions throughout the history of the nation.

Roosevelt promised to balance the budget, to cut spending....as Harding had....but he didn't follow through on the promise.




So....what really happened?

You continue to evade and deflect responding to the challenge I have given you based on my post #51. A basic and fundamental fact has been provided that proves your distortion and the premise of your thesis to be misinformed and dishonest and yet you seem unable to even attempt to respond.

Less than a year after FDR was inaugurated in March of 1933, what had been a troublesome drought became the crisis that would plague the country for the entire decade. The anti-FDR folks like to ignore Dust Bowl Storms that swept across the farmlands and ranches creating massive unemployment. The first major storm hit on Nov. 11, 1933, and was soon followed by another major storm on May 9, 1934. There is some discrepancy on the dates due to what are defined by various sources as "major". In between the major storms were a series of continuous lesser regional storms.

history.com/topics/dust-bowl

I know you'd like to ignore the documented facts that I've provided....including Roosevelt's own words.....but try, anyway: why did he promise to cut spending, balance the budge, reduce deficits, ....
...and do the very opposite?
I gave my explanation: The reason was political: we wanted to be a dictator, like his pals Stalin and Mussolini.....

What's yours?

I am not ignoring anything. I have challenged some of your major and primary alleged facts as being distorted and dishonest. Instead of answering you simply answer my questions with new questions of your own. I just gave you an answer with a link to show the drastic change that occurred less than a year after FDR was inaugurated. You will not respond to the claim that the Dust Bowl Storms crippled the countries major industry, agriculture and make pretend like the Dust Bowl crisis was irrelevant. You have been given a very specific answer to your question. Why do you continue to ask the same question and ignore the answer you have been given?

Had nothing to do with Roosevelt's infamy.

Hoover doled out hundreds of millions of dollars to wheat and cotton farmers even as the new tariffs wiped out their markets.

The FDR administration also paid farmers for the first time for not working at all. Even if the AAA had helped farmers by curtailing supplies 17 18 and raising prices, it could have done so only by hurting millions of others who had to pay those prices or make do with less to eat.
Hans F. Sennholz, “The Great Depression,” The Freeman, April 1975, p. 210

And...
From The Liberal Tradition: A Free People and a Free Economy by Lewis W. Douglas, as quoted in “Monetary Central Planning and the State, Part XIV: The New Deal and Its Critics,” by Richard M. Ebeling in Freedom Daily, February 1998, p. 12.



I love showing what a Roosevelt apologist you are.

Here is another revelation PC-----> As with FDR, we see that the further left the candidate is, the more they have to lie to get elected. Look at FDR! Look at Obama! JFK did not have to lie, and neither did Bill Clinton. That tells you how far LEFT the Democrats have gone; although Bernie believes he can tell the truth and get elected. He feels the country has moved far enough left that his ideas are commonplace. Only with the young people they are, lol!

 

[imawhosure]

If only you had an education.

Let's see.

The League of Nations collected data from many nations throughout the 1930s on industrial production, unemployment, national debt, and taxes.
How did Roosevelt's United States compare with other countries?

In all four of these key indexes the United States did very poorly, almost worse than any other nation in the study.

Most European nations handled the Great Depression better than the United States.


World Economic Survey: Eighth Year, 1938/1939 (Geneva: League of Nations, 1939) p.128, quoted in "New Deal or Raw Deal?: How FDR's Economic Legacy Has Damaged America," by Burton W. Folsom Jr


So...not only did the "great" Emperor Franklin the First manage to extend and magnify the depression, but he couldn't compete with the leaders of most European nations.


"Great" seems to have developed a new definition.

Who cares about you apples and oranges statistical comparisons, one nation to another for that period? It seems you're only good at producing the straw man to deflect from an accurate, lucid and cogent response. That was not the premise of your OP, twit!

I reminded ALL that the US was not alone in the problem and that it was an economic problem. Your claim that the depression as experienced in the US, in your words, "The Damage of the Depression Wasn't Economic... it was political!" are just plain wrong and revisionist! To claim the that the major issue Americans faced during the depression, like my own father, was political and not economic is bloody STUPID AND IGNORANT!!!!

That sophistry just don't get off the ground, Chica, and no amount of revisionist claptrap can change the true historical record!

Wasn't that great....today I rammed your lying words right down your throat...

...and, was it yesterday, that I corrected your potty mouth.

What a typical Liberal you are, huh?

Oh horseshit, Chica! The OP was a piece of contrived shit that only the brain dead or the sycophantic sheep of your far right Nazi faction would be capable of accepting as truth. You can't make a silk purse out of your horseshit revisionists fantasies. The OP is a FAIL, twit.

Producing a straw man is not a refutation, idiot! And I note with great amusement that you mentioned not a word of my post that obliterated the premise of your OP and your previous post, but rather you turn to ad hominem to shroud your humiliation. That's what you do every time you suffer a self-inflicted injury, Chica!

I just wanted to see how long it would take me to force you into vulgarity.

And what does that have to do with your perfidy, you twit? I told you before, Chica, horseshit is horseshit. You don't like being called on your spreading that same manure, stop spreading it, and pretending you're so very offended by the reality that vulgarity exits most everywhere and especially in your type of lies and distortions, you narcissistic phony!

Sorry, most everything she posted is true. If you don't want to believe it, suit yourself, nobody is twisting your arm here.

To try and insist FDR was good economically, would be like myself and PC saying Nixon was not a crook, or that FDR was not a good war President! Reality is what it is, no matter how hard some people want to deny it. He lengthened the depression through economic incompetence, had to lie to get elected, then fooled with the economy making it far worse than it should have been, ala Obungles.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If only you had an education.

Let's see.

The League of Nations collected data from many nations throughout the 1930s on industrial production, unemployment, national debt, and taxes.
How did Roosevelt's United States compare with other countries?

In all four of these key indexes the United States did very poorly, almost worse than any other nation in the study.

Most European nations handled the Great Depression better than the United States.


World Economic Survey: Eighth Year, 1938/1939 (Geneva: League of Nations, 1939) p.128, quoted in "New Deal or Raw Deal?: How FDR's Economic Legacy Has Damaged America," by Burton W. Folsom Jr


So...not only did the "great" Emperor Franklin the First manage to extend and magnify the depression, but he couldn't compete with the leaders of most European nations.


"Great" seems to have developed a new definition.

Who cares about you apples and oranges statistical comparisons, one nation to another for that period? It seems you're only good at producing the straw man to deflect from an accurate, lucid and cogent response. That was not the premise of your OP, twit!

I reminded ALL that the US was not alone in the problem and that it was an economic problem. Your claim that the depression as experienced in the US, in your words, "The Damage of the Depression Wasn't Economic... it was political!" are just plain wrong and revisionist! To claim the that the major issue Americans faced during the depression, like my own father, was political and not economic is bloody STUPID AND IGNORANT!!!!

That sophistry just don't get off the ground, Chica, and no amount of revisionist claptrap can change the true historical record!

Wasn't that great....today I rammed your lying words right down your throat...

...and, was it yesterday, that I corrected your potty mouth.

What a typical Liberal you are, huh?

Oh horseshit, Chica! The OP was a piece of contrived shit that only the brain dead or the sycophantic sheep of your far right Nazi faction would be capable of accepting as truth. You can't make a silk purse out of your horseshit revisionists fantasies. The OP is a FAIL, twit.

Producing a straw man is not a refutation, idiot! And I note with great amusement that you mentioned not a word of my post that obliterated the premise of your OP and your previous post, but rather you turn to ad hominem to shroud your humiliation. That's what you do every time you suffer a self-inflicted injury, Chica!

I just wanted to see how long it would take me to force you into vulgarity.

And what does that have to do with your perfidy, you twit? I told you before, Chica, horseshit is horseshit. You don't like being called on your spreading that same manure, stop spreading it, and pretending you're so very offended by the reality that vulgarity exits most everywhere and especially in your type of lies and distortions, you narcissistic phony!

Time and again, when folks realize they have been skewered, their language falls to the vulgar. It's one of those hard to hide psychological tells....your anger at being bested leaks out as vulgarity.

That is why I never have to do the same.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

Who cares about you apples and oranges statistical comparisons, one nation to another for that period? It seems you're only good at producing the straw man to deflect from an accurate, lucid and cogent response. That was not the premise of your OP, twit!

I reminded ALL that the US was not alone in the problem and that it was an economic problem. Your claim that the depression as experienced in the US, in your words, "The Damage of the Depression Wasn't Economic... it was political!" are just plain wrong and revisionist! To claim the that the major issue Americans faced during the depression, like my own father, was political and not economic is bloody STUPID AND IGNORANT!!!!

That sophistry just don't get off the ground, Chica, and no amount of revisionist claptrap can change the true historical record!

Wasn't that great....today I rammed your lying words right down your throat...

...and, was it yesterday, that I corrected your potty mouth.

What a typical Liberal you are, huh?

Oh horseshit, Chica! The OP was a piece of contrived shit that only the brain dead or the sycophantic sheep of your far right Nazi faction would be capable of accepting as truth. You can't make a silk purse out of your horseshit revisionists fantasies. The OP is a FAIL, twit.

Producing a straw man is not a refutation, idiot! And I note with great amusement that you mentioned not a word of my post that obliterated the premise of your OP and your previous post, but rather you turn to ad hominem to shroud your humiliation. That's what you do every time you suffer a self-inflicted injury, Chica!

I just wanted to see how long it would take me to force you into vulgarity.

And what does that have to do with your perfidy, you twit? I told you before, Chica, horseshit is horseshit. You don't like being called on your spreading that same manure, stop spreading it, and pretending you're so very offended by the reality that vulgarity exits most everywhere and especially in your type of lies and distortions, you narcissistic phony!

Sorry, most everything she posted is true. If you don't want to believe it, suit yourself, nobody is twisting your arm here.

To try and insist FDR was good economically, would be like myself and PC saying Nixon was not a crook, or that FDR was not a good war President! Reality is what it is, no matter how hard some people want to deny it. He lengthened the depression through economic incompetence, had to lie to get elected, then fooled with the economy making it far worse than it should have been, ala Obungles.

I won't be deluded by the suggestion of another that everything Chica posts is true. I've caught her in too many outright lies and distortions. In the past three days, I caught her in a redaction she had done to a quotation that purposefully altered the meaning. That is not the person you are describing. She has proven to be the deceitful and dishonest person that so many others see. She is a despicable and untrustworthy human being in my view based on her own conduct over long observation.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

Who cares about you apples and oranges statistical comparisons, one nation to another for that period? It seems you're only good at producing the straw man to deflect from an accurate, lucid and cogent response. That was not the premise of your OP, twit!

I reminded ALL that the US was not alone in the problem and that it was an economic problem. Your claim that the depression as experienced in the US, in your words, "The Damage of the Depression Wasn't Economic... it was political!" are just plain wrong and revisionist! To claim the that the major issue Americans faced during the depression, like my own father, was political and not economic is bloody STUPID AND IGNORANT!!!!

That sophistry just don't get off the ground, Chica, and no amount of revisionist claptrap can change the true historical record!

Wasn't that great....today I rammed your lying words right down your throat...

...and, was it yesterday, that I corrected your potty mouth.

What a typical Liberal you are, huh?

Oh horseshit, Chica! The OP was a piece of contrived shit that only the brain dead or the sycophantic sheep of your far right Nazi faction would be capable of accepting as truth. You can't make a silk purse out of your horseshit revisionists fantasies. The OP is a FAIL, twit.

Producing a straw man is not a refutation, idiot! And I note with great amusement that you mentioned not a word of my post that obliterated the premise of your OP and your previous post, but rather you turn to ad hominem to shroud your humiliation. That's what you do every time you suffer a self-inflicted injury, Chica!

I just wanted to see how long it would take me to force you into vulgarity.

And what does that have to do with your perfidy, you twit? I told you before, Chica, horseshit is horseshit. You don't like being called on your spreading that same manure, stop spreading it, and pretending you're so very offended by the reality that vulgarity exits most everywhere and especially in your type of lies and distortions, you narcissistic phony!

Time and again, when folks realize they have been skewered, their language falls to the vulgar. It's one of those hard to hide psychological tells....your anger at being bested leaks out as vulgarity.

That is why I never have to do the same.

How the Hell have you bested me when you haven't addressed the points made, IDIOT!

 

[PoliticalChic]

9. And, Roosevelt was not just an economic failure.....he failed as an American President. He instituted not freedom and liberty...but the very attributes of fascism.



"Perhaps the most radical aspect of the New Deal was the National Industrial Recovery Act, passed in June 1933, which created a massive new bureaucracy called the National Recovery Administration. Under the NRA, most manufacturing industries were suddenly forced into government-mandated cartels. Codes that regulated prices and terms of sale briefly transformed much of the American economy into a fascist-style arrangement, while the NRA was financed by new taxes on the very industries it controlled.

Some economists have estimated that the NRA boosted the cost of doing business by an average of 40 percent — not something a depressed economy needed for recovery.


a. "The man Roosevelt picked to direct the NRA effort was General Hugh “Iron Pants” Johnson, a profane, red-faced bully At the nadir of the Great Depression, half of American industrial production was idle as the economy reeled under the weight of endless and destructive policies from both Republicans and Democrats in Washington."
Milton Friedman and Anna Jacobson Schwartz, "A Monetary History of the United States, 1867-1960," (New York: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1963; 9th paperback printing by Princeton University Press, 1993), p 330.


.... and professed admirer of Italian dictator Benito Mussolini. Thundered Johnson, “May Almighty God have mercy on anyone who attempts to interfere with the Blue Eagle” (the official symbol of the NRA, which one senator derisively referred to as the “Soviet duck.”)

Those who refused to comply with the NRA Johnson personally threatened with public boycotts and “a punch in the nose.”
Blue Eagles, Red Ducks

Does that sound like America?

How about this:

b. A New Jersey tailor named Jacob Maged was arrested and sent to jail for the “crime” of pressing a suit of clothes for 35 cents rather than the NRA-inspired “Tailor’s Code” of 40 cents.



And this was the cost of the Depression....worse than economic: the cost was political.....America's birthright.....liberty.

 

[imawhosure]

9. And, Roosevelt was not just an economic failure.....he failed as an American President. He instituted not freedom and liberty...but the very attributes of fascism.



"Perhaps the most radical aspect of the New Deal was the National Industrial Recovery Act, passed in June 1933, which created a massive new bureaucracy called the National Recovery Administration. Under the NRA, most manufacturing industries were suddenly forced into government-mandated cartels. Codes that regulated prices and terms of sale briefly transformed much of the American economy into a fascist-style arrangement, while the NRA was financed by new taxes on the very industries it controlled.

Some economists have estimated that the NRA boosted the cost of doing business by an average of 40 percent — not something a depressed economy needed for recovery.


a. "The man Roosevelt picked to direct the NRA effort was General Hugh “Iron Pants” Johnson, a profane, red-faced bully At the nadir of the Great Depression, half of American industrial production was idle as the economy reeled under the weight of endless and destructive policies from both Republicans and Democrats in Washington."
Milton Friedman and Anna Jacobson Schwartz, "A Monetary History of the United States, 1867-1960," (New York: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1963; 9th paperback printing by Princeton University Press, 1993), p 330.


.... and professed admirer of Italian dictator Benito Mussolini. Thundered Johnson, “May Almighty God have mercy on anyone who attempts to interfere with the Blue Eagle” (the official symbol of the NRA, which one senator derisively referred to as the “Soviet duck.”)

Those who refused to comply with the NRA Johnson personally threatened with public boycotts and “a punch in the nose.”
Blue Eagles, Red Ducks

Does that sound like America?

How about this:

b. A New Jersey tailor named Jacob Maged was arrested and sent to jail for the “crime” of pressing a suit of clothes for 35 cents rather than the NRA-inspired “Tailor’s Code” of 40 cents.



And this was the cost of the Depression....worse than economic: the cost was political.....America's birthright.....liberty.

Well PC, I read "thoughtcrimes" rebuttal, so I am watching closely. I read more history than 95% of the people on here, and after reading this one statement of yours..........not every statement ever mind you because I do not have that much time...............this one statement is 100% accurate!

Trust me "Thoughtcrimes," it is.

Imagine, being harassed because you didn't charge what the government thought was fair for a service. What does that remind you of? I will let you answer that question yourself!