The Great Depression in a nutshell

[bullwinkle]

FDR said that working for dollars was better than charity, so able people worked during the Great Depression. The PWA and WPA supplied the jobs
The WPA built 1000 miles of airport runways,
651,000 miles of highways
12,400 bridges
8000 parks
installed 69.000 highway light poles
made 18,000 play grounds
made 125,000 public buildings
made 41,000 schools
improved 41.300 schools.
Created TVA
and that was just the WPA. there was still the PWA and for the kids on the road the CCC.

Will of those billions spent, yes there was some good. Mostly bad though.

Gipper, it wasn't a hand-out or subsidy..it was work...low pay but work..which is what people wanted, not charity. And they took pride in what they accomplished.

Good for them, but it did nothing end the GD. Dumb fuck FDR impoverished the nation for over ten years, with his dipshit policies.

So if FDR had let that 25% unemployed and the millions who lost homes to flounder instead of a helping hand, would the GD have ended sooner? Trickle down, so to speak?

Dumb fuck FDR FORCED farmers all over the nation to destroy their crops. Under the kindergarten belief that scarcity would raise prices. This while many Americans were starving. The man was a dunce of dunces.

He should be condemned by all Americans. Sadly in the Age of Statism, Americans are unable to think.

Hmmm, is that anything like forcing hundreds of thousands of people to work without paychecks?

 

[gipper]

Will of those billions spent, yes there was some good. Mostly bad though.

Gipper, it wasn't a hand-out or subsidy..it was work...low pay but work..which is what people wanted, not charity. And they took pride in what they accomplished.

Good for them, but it did nothing end the GD. Dumb fuck FDR impoverished the nation for over ten years, with his dipshit policies.

So if FDR had let that 25% unemployed and the millions who lost homes to flounder instead of a helping hand, would the GD have ended sooner? Trickle down, so to speak?

Dumb fuck FDR FORCED farmers all over the nation to destroy their crops. Under the kindergarten belief that scarcity would raise prices. This while many Americans were starving. The man was a dunce of dunces.

He should be condemned by all Americans. Sadly in the Age of Statism, Americans are unable to think.

Just don't understand the problem farmers faced and why the problem.

Yeah starving Americans...fuck them.

 

[regent]

FDR said that working for dollars was better than charity, so able people worked during the Great Depression. The PWA and WPA supplied the jobs
The WPA built 1000 miles of airport runways,
651,000 miles of highways
12,400 bridges
8000 parks
installed 69.000 highway light poles
made 18,000 play grounds
made 125,000 public buildings
made 41,000 schools
improved 41.300 schools.
Created TVA
and that was just the WPA. there was still the PWA and for the kids on the road the CCC.

Will of those billions spent, yes there was some good. Mostly bad though.

Gipper, it wasn't a hand-out or subsidy..it was work...low pay but work..which is what people wanted, not charity. And they took pride in what they accomplished.

Good for them, but it did nothing end the GD. Dumb fuck FDR impoverished the nation for over ten years, with his dipshit policies.

So if FDR had let that 25% unemployed and the millions who lost homes to flounder instead of a helping hand, would the GD have ended sooner? Trickle down, so to speak?

Dumb fuck FDR FORCED farmers all over the nation to destroy their crops. Under the kindergarten belief that scarcity would raise prices. This while many Americans were starving. The man was a dunce of dunces.

He should be condemned by all Americans. Sadly in the Age of Statism, Americans are unable to think.

So is FDR's AAA still around?

 

[regent]

FDR was a Moon Bat asshole. A fucking Democrat moron that thought government could fix things.

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

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

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.

After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years.

"Why the Great Depression lasted so long has always been a great mystery, and because we never really knew the reason, we have always worried whether we would have another 10- to 15-year economic slump," said Ohanian, vice chair of UCLA's Department of Economics. "We found that a relapse isn't likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies."

Like so much of what is taught in government schools, the truth about Great Depression won’t be found there. This spells it out rather succinctly.



Failure of the New Deal

At the outset of the Great Depression, 1929, the unemployment rate in America was 2.9% according to U.S. Dept. of Commerce statistics. Unemployment reached its peak in 1933 at 24.9%. There was a bit of a recovery as mal-investments were liquidated, but it only dropped the unemployment rate to 14.3% by 1939. It rose to 19.0% in 1938 and was still 14.6% in 1940, on the eve of American entry into World War II. Personal consumption expenditures were still lower in 1940 ($71.9 billion) than in 1929 ($78.9 billion). All of this despite eight years of unprecedented New Deal “stimulus spending,” regulating, controlling, subsidizing, lending, inflating, price-controlling, and taxing. The New Deal was an utter failure to the American people. Economists Richard Vedder and Lowell Gallaway estimated in their book, Out of Work, that the unemployment rate was eight percentage points higher in 1940 than it otherwise would have been without New Deal minimum-wage and pro-union legislation alone.

Nor did World War II end the Great Depression. It ended high unemployment only because some 16 million men were sent overseas during the war. Sending a man to die in a foxhole in Germany is not the same as that man going to work in his own country and returning home to have dinner with his family every evening, contrary to Keynesian folklore about how the war supposedly “ended the Great Depression.” The average American family back at home was even worse off because of the massive diversion of resources from the consumer and business side of the economy to the government’s military infrastructure. The production of new automobiles and other products was made illegal, food was rationed, and everyone sacrificed even more.

The Great Depression did not really end until after the war was over and the army was demobilized, returning billions of dollars of resources to the private sector. Federal government expenditures fell from $98.4 billion in 1945 to $33 billion in 1948. As a result, the year 1946 was the most prosperous year in all of American history in terms of the growth of the private components of GDP: private consumption and investment spending increased by 30% in that one year; no other year has ever been remotely close to that growth rate. Keynesian economists predicted another Great Depression because of the two-thirds reduction in federal spending while the exact opposite happened. That should have discredited Keynesianism forever, but the Washington establishment just ignored or lied about this fact, as it does to this very day.

It took some seventy years, but the “mainstream” of the economics profession finally caught on to this truth, a truth that was recognized by Austrian School economists all along. In an August 2004 article in the prestigious Journal of Political Economy by Harold Cole and Lee Ohanian entitled “New Deal Policies and the Persistence of the Great Depression” the authors concluded that “New Deal . . . policies did not lift the economy out of the Depression . . . the abandonment of these policies coincided with the strong economic recovery of the 1940s” (emphasis added).

Nevertheless, the New Deal was a political power bonanza for FDR and his fellow Democrats. According to a 1938 Official Report of the U.S. Senate Committee on Campaign Expenditures it was routine for the Roosevelt administration to demand that recipients of government make-work jobs, of which there were millions, register and vote as Democrats. As Jim Couch and William Shughart wrote in The Political Economy of the New Deal, “The distribution of the billions of dollars appropriated by Congress to prime the economic pump was guided less by considerations of economic need than by the forces of ordinary politics.” For example, the nation’s number one economic problem was the South, but since the South was solidly Democratic it received relatively little New Deal spending compared to other regions where FDR needed the votes. And, “The states that gave Franklin Roosevelt larger percentages of the popular vote in 1932 were rewarded with significantly more federal aid than less-supportive constituencies.” What else would anyone expect?

Green Socialism - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

My mother and father both lived through the Great Depression as they were both still in their preteens when it happened. They remember the long lines at the food stores, expensive gas, and other commodities that just were available, because most people lost hope for a better life. Does that sound like some 1/2 white fagot who promised Hope and Change, but soon talked about unemployment was the new norm? But as typical of US citizens, my family was able to tighten up the bootstraps, and weather through the malaise that FDR brought upon the states. The revision of History has been the whole concept of the Marxist left, because since they have taken the media and public education, they can say what ever they want, and most of the dumbass left will believe it. Here are some examples.

https://nypost.com/2015/06/26/how-the-left-rewrites-history-and-defames-the-south/
Setting the Record Straight: American History in Black & White by David Barton

If the blacks ever found out how duped they were by the progs, they would be out burning down the houses of said progs...

Gas was two gallons for a quarter. I think you mixed up WW II and the Great Depression. I would suspect that American Blacks still vote Democratic.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Will of those billions spent, yes there was some good. Mostly bad though.

Gipper, it wasn't a hand-out or subsidy..it was work...low pay but work..which is what people wanted, not charity. And they took pride in what they accomplished.

Good for them, but it did nothing end the GD. Dumb fuck FDR impoverished the nation for over ten years, with his dipshit policies.

So if FDR had let that 25% unemployed and the millions who lost homes to flounder instead of a helping hand, would the GD have ended sooner? Trickle down, so to speak?

Dumb fuck FDR FORCED farmers all over the nation to destroy their crops. Under the kindergarten belief that scarcity would raise prices. This while many Americans were starving. The man was a dunce of dunces.

He should be condemned by all Americans. Sadly in the Age of Statism, Americans are unable to think.

Hmmm, is that anything like forcing hundreds of thousands of people to work without paychecks?

Force people to work? Are you saying after 8 Years of Obama, that his admin has started forcing people to work? No wonder President Trump got elected to stop the Socialism of forced labor on the US citizens...

 

[jasonnfree]

Being born toward the end of WW2 I certainly don't remember FDR. I have met and worked with many of those from the depression and WW2 generation though, and never met one who thought FDR didn't make things much better for America. My own thought is America started really going downhill after Reagan got in although I don't think he was a bad guy himself. He just ran with the speeches the ultra right business class gave him that hammered in ad nauseam the lie that government is the problem, not the solution. That ultra right business class sure avails themselves of uncle sam's goodies like bailouts when they get in trouble, getting us involved in foreign entanglements (war is always good for business), that the founders told us not to get involved in. No, the billionaires and corporations claim the government as their own property and set the working class folks squabbling and fighting each other....republican goood, democwat baaaad.

 

[regent]

FDR was a Moon Bat asshole. A fucking Democrat moron that thought government could fix things.

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

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

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.

After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years.

"Why the Great Depression lasted so long has always been a great mystery, and because we never really knew the reason, we have always worried whether we would have another 10- to 15-year economic slump," said Ohanian, vice chair of UCLA's Department of Economics. "We found that a relapse isn't likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies."

So Hoover had a better plan: give money to industry to make more products that al ready sat on their shelves unsold. Is that the reason the depression lasted so long? In any case Hoover was gone in a short time, and as people expected the new FDR administration got involved by putting people first. Both political parties reacted according to their philosophies, people first or business first.







both

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Like so much of what is taught in government schools, the truth about Great Depression won’t be found there. This spells it out rather succinctly.



Failure of the New Deal

At the outset of the Great Depression, 1929, the unemployment rate in America was 2.9% according to U.S. Dept. of Commerce statistics. Unemployment reached its peak in 1933 at 24.9%. There was a bit of a recovery as mal-investments were liquidated, but it only dropped the unemployment rate to 14.3% by 1939. It rose to 19.0% in 1938 and was still 14.6% in 1940, on the eve of American entry into World War II. Personal consumption expenditures were still lower in 1940 ($71.9 billion) than in 1929 ($78.9 billion). All of this despite eight years of unprecedented New Deal “stimulus spending,” regulating, controlling, subsidizing, lending, inflating, price-controlling, and taxing. The New Deal was an utter failure to the American people. Economists Richard Vedder and Lowell Gallaway estimated in their book, Out of Work, that the unemployment rate was eight percentage points higher in 1940 than it otherwise would have been without New Deal minimum-wage and pro-union legislation alone.

Nor did World War II end the Great Depression. It ended high unemployment only because some 16 million men were sent overseas during the war. Sending a man to die in a foxhole in Germany is not the same as that man going to work in his own country and returning home to have dinner with his family every evening, contrary to Keynesian folklore about how the war supposedly “ended the Great Depression.” The average American family back at home was even worse off because of the massive diversion of resources from the consumer and business side of the economy to the government’s military infrastructure. The production of new automobiles and other products was made illegal, food was rationed, and everyone sacrificed even more.

The Great Depression did not really end until after the war was over and the army was demobilized, returning billions of dollars of resources to the private sector. Federal government expenditures fell from $98.4 billion in 1945 to $33 billion in 1948. As a result, the year 1946 was the most prosperous year in all of American history in terms of the growth of the private components of GDP: private consumption and investment spending increased by 30% in that one year; no other year has ever been remotely close to that growth rate. Keynesian economists predicted another Great Depression because of the two-thirds reduction in federal spending while the exact opposite happened. That should have discredited Keynesianism forever, but the Washington establishment just ignored or lied about this fact, as it does to this very day.

It took some seventy years, but the “mainstream” of the economics profession finally caught on to this truth, a truth that was recognized by Austrian School economists all along. In an August 2004 article in the prestigious Journal of Political Economy by Harold Cole and Lee Ohanian entitled “New Deal Policies and the Persistence of the Great Depression” the authors concluded that “New Deal . . . policies did not lift the economy out of the Depression . . . the abandonment of these policies coincided with the strong economic recovery of the 1940s” (emphasis added).

Nevertheless, the New Deal was a political power bonanza for FDR and his fellow Democrats. According to a 1938 Official Report of the U.S. Senate Committee on Campaign Expenditures it was routine for the Roosevelt administration to demand that recipients of government make-work jobs, of which there were millions, register and vote as Democrats. As Jim Couch and William Shughart wrote in The Political Economy of the New Deal, “The distribution of the billions of dollars appropriated by Congress to prime the economic pump was guided less by considerations of economic need than by the forces of ordinary politics.” For example, the nation’s number one economic problem was the South, but since the South was solidly Democratic it received relatively little New Deal spending compared to other regions where FDR needed the votes. And, “The states that gave Franklin Roosevelt larger percentages of the popular vote in 1932 were rewarded with significantly more federal aid than less-supportive constituencies.” What else would anyone expect?

Green Socialism - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Great stuff there.we were always taught that Hoover wrecked the economy but FDR saved us which is BS as that link proves,as we both know,he expanded what Hoover started.same as how Obama expanded whT bush got started.

 

[gipper]

Like so much of what is taught in government schools, the truth about Great Depression won’t be found there. This spells it out rather succinctly.



Failure of the New Deal

At the outset of the Great Depression, 1929, the unemployment rate in America was 2.9% according to U.S. Dept. of Commerce statistics. Unemployment reached its peak in 1933 at 24.9%. There was a bit of a recovery as mal-investments were liquidated, but it only dropped the unemployment rate to 14.3% by 1939. It rose to 19.0% in 1938 and was still 14.6% in 1940, on the eve of American entry into World War II. Personal consumption expenditures were still lower in 1940 ($71.9 billion) than in 1929 ($78.9 billion). All of this despite eight years of unprecedented New Deal “stimulus spending,” regulating, controlling, subsidizing, lending, inflating, price-controlling, and taxing. The New Deal was an utter failure to the American people. Economists Richard Vedder and Lowell Gallaway estimated in their book, Out of Work, that the unemployment rate was eight percentage points higher in 1940 than it otherwise would have been without New Deal minimum-wage and pro-union legislation alone.

Nor did World War II end the Great Depression. It ended high unemployment only because some 16 million men were sent overseas during the war. Sending a man to die in a foxhole in Germany is not the same as that man going to work in his own country and returning home to have dinner with his family every evening, contrary to Keynesian folklore about how the war supposedly “ended the Great Depression.” The average American family back at home was even worse off because of the massive diversion of resources from the consumer and business side of the economy to the government’s military infrastructure. The production of new automobiles and other products was made illegal, food was rationed, and everyone sacrificed even more.

The Great Depression did not really end until after the war was over and the army was demobilized, returning billions of dollars of resources to the private sector. Federal government expenditures fell from $98.4 billion in 1945 to $33 billion in 1948. As a result, the year 1946 was the most prosperous year in all of American history in terms of the growth of the private components of GDP: private consumption and investment spending increased by 30% in that one year; no other year has ever been remotely close to that growth rate. Keynesian economists predicted another Great Depression because of the two-thirds reduction in federal spending while the exact opposite happened. That should have discredited Keynesianism forever, but the Washington establishment just ignored or lied about this fact, as it does to this very day.

It took some seventy years, but the “mainstream” of the economics profession finally caught on to this truth, a truth that was recognized by Austrian School economists all along. In an August 2004 article in the prestigious Journal of Political Economy by Harold Cole and Lee Ohanian entitled “New Deal Policies and the Persistence of the Great Depression” the authors concluded that “New Deal . . . policies did not lift the economy out of the Depression . . . the abandonment of these policies coincided with the strong economic recovery of the 1940s” (emphasis added).

Nevertheless, the New Deal was a political power bonanza for FDR and his fellow Democrats. According to a 1938 Official Report of the U.S. Senate Committee on Campaign Expenditures it was routine for the Roosevelt administration to demand that recipients of government make-work jobs, of which there were millions, register and vote as Democrats. As Jim Couch and William Shughart wrote in The Political Economy of the New Deal, “The distribution of the billions of dollars appropriated by Congress to prime the economic pump was guided less by considerations of economic need than by the forces of ordinary politics.” For example, the nation’s number one economic problem was the South, but since the South was solidly Democratic it received relatively little New Deal spending compared to other regions where FDR needed the votes. And, “The states that gave Franklin Roosevelt larger percentages of the popular vote in 1932 were rewarded with significantly more federal aid than less-supportive constituencies.” What else would anyone expect?

Green Socialism - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Great stuff there.we were always taught that Hoover wrecked the economy but FDR saved us which is BS as that link proves,as we both know,he expanded what Hoover started.same as how Obama expanded whT bush got started.

Isn’t that most ironic?

FDR campaigned AGAINST government intervention in the economy, in 1932. He roundly condemned Hoover for his many interventions. Then he intervened much more than Hoover ever did.

Just as O condemned W, then did much like W.

Politicians never change, but somehow Americans get duped every time.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Like so much of what is taught in government schools, the truth about Great Depression won’t be found there. This spells it out rather succinctly.



Failure of the New Deal

At the outset of the Great Depression, 1929, the unemployment rate in America was 2.9% according to U.S. Dept. of Commerce statistics. Unemployment reached its peak in 1933 at 24.9%. There was a bit of a recovery as mal-investments were liquidated, but it only dropped the unemployment rate to 14.3% by 1939. It rose to 19.0% in 1938 and was still 14.6% in 1940, on the eve of American entry into World War II. Personal consumption expenditures were still lower in 1940 ($71.9 billion) than in 1929 ($78.9 billion). All of this despite eight years of unprecedented New Deal “stimulus spending,” regulating, controlling, subsidizing, lending, inflating, price-controlling, and taxing. The New Deal was an utter failure to the American people. Economists Richard Vedder and Lowell Gallaway estimated in their book, Out of Work, that the unemployment rate was eight percentage points higher in 1940 than it otherwise would have been without New Deal minimum-wage and pro-union legislation alone.

Nor did World War II end the Great Depression. It ended high unemployment only because some 16 million men were sent overseas during the war. Sending a man to die in a foxhole in Germany is not the same as that man going to work in his own country and returning home to have dinner with his family every evening, contrary to Keynesian folklore about how the war supposedly “ended the Great Depression.” The average American family back at home was even worse off because of the massive diversion of resources from the consumer and business side of the economy to the government’s military infrastructure. The production of new automobiles and other products was made illegal, food was rationed, and everyone sacrificed even more.

The Great Depression did not really end until after the war was over and the army was demobilized, returning billions of dollars of resources to the private sector. Federal government expenditures fell from $98.4 billion in 1945 to $33 billion in 1948. As a result, the year 1946 was the most prosperous year in all of American history in terms of the growth of the private components of GDP: private consumption and investment spending increased by 30% in that one year; no other year has ever been remotely close to that growth rate. Keynesian economists predicted another Great Depression because of the two-thirds reduction in federal spending while the exact opposite happened. That should have discredited Keynesianism forever, but the Washington establishment just ignored or lied about this fact, as it does to this very day.

It took some seventy years, but the “mainstream” of the economics profession finally caught on to this truth, a truth that was recognized by Austrian School economists all along. In an August 2004 article in the prestigious Journal of Political Economy by Harold Cole and Lee Ohanian entitled “New Deal Policies and the Persistence of the Great Depression” the authors concluded that “New Deal . . . policies did not lift the economy out of the Depression . . . the abandonment of these policies coincided with the strong economic recovery of the 1940s” (emphasis added).

Nevertheless, the New Deal was a political power bonanza for FDR and his fellow Democrats. According to a 1938 Official Report of the U.S. Senate Committee on Campaign Expenditures it was routine for the Roosevelt administration to demand that recipients of government make-work jobs, of which there were millions, register and vote as Democrats. As Jim Couch and William Shughart wrote in The Political Economy of the New Deal, “The distribution of the billions of dollars appropriated by Congress to prime the economic pump was guided less by considerations of economic need than by the forces of ordinary politics.” For example, the nation’s number one economic problem was the South, but since the South was solidly Democratic it received relatively little New Deal spending compared to other regions where FDR needed the votes. And, “The states that gave Franklin Roosevelt larger percentages of the popular vote in 1932 were rewarded with significantly more federal aid than less-supportive constituencies.” What else would anyone expect?

Green Socialism - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Great stuff there.we were always taught that Hoover wrecked the economy but FDR saved us which is BS as that link proves,as we both know,he expanded what Hoover started.same as how Obama expanded whT bush got started.

Isn’t that most ironic?

FDR campaigned AGAINST government intervention in the economy, in 1932. He roundly condemned Hoover for his many interventions. Then he intervened much more than Hoover ever did.

Just as O condemned W, then did much like W.

Politicians never change, but somehow Americans get duped every time.

FDR campaigned AGAINST government intervention in the economy, in 1932.

Is that why FDR took US off the gold standard and demanded that gold coins be turned in or else face jail time? At that time a 20 dollar gold piece was worth 20 dollars, but once FDR took control, that 20 dollar gold piece(1 ounce of gold) was then worth 25 dollars. Did the gold get more valuable? No but the dollar shrunk by 25 percent. And then the rest is history, with gold almost 2000 dollars. You can thank a lib for that shit...

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Like so much of what is taught in government schools, the truth about Great Depression won’t be found there. This spells it out rather succinctly.



Failure of the New Deal

At the outset of the Great Depression, 1929, the unemployment rate in America was 2.9% according to U.S. Dept. of Commerce statistics. Unemployment reached its peak in 1933 at 24.9%. There was a bit of a recovery as mal-investments were liquidated, but it only dropped the unemployment rate to 14.3% by 1939. It rose to 19.0% in 1938 and was still 14.6% in 1940, on the eve of American entry into World War II. Personal consumption expenditures were still lower in 1940 ($71.9 billion) than in 1929 ($78.9 billion). All of this despite eight years of unprecedented New Deal “stimulus spending,” regulating, controlling, subsidizing, lending, inflating, price-controlling, and taxing. The New Deal was an utter failure to the American people. Economists Richard Vedder and Lowell Gallaway estimated in their book, Out of Work, that the unemployment rate was eight percentage points higher in 1940 than it otherwise would have been without New Deal minimum-wage and pro-union legislation alone.

Nor did World War II end the Great Depression. It ended high unemployment only because some 16 million men were sent overseas during the war. Sending a man to die in a foxhole in Germany is not the same as that man going to work in his own country and returning home to have dinner with his family every evening, contrary to Keynesian folklore about how the war supposedly “ended the Great Depression.” The average American family back at home was even worse off because of the massive diversion of resources from the consumer and business side of the economy to the government’s military infrastructure. The production of new automobiles and other products was made illegal, food was rationed, and everyone sacrificed even more.

The Great Depression did not really end until after the war was over and the army was demobilized, returning billions of dollars of resources to the private sector. Federal government expenditures fell from $98.4 billion in 1945 to $33 billion in 1948. As a result, the year 1946 was the most prosperous year in all of American history in terms of the growth of the private components of GDP: private consumption and investment spending increased by 30% in that one year; no other year has ever been remotely close to that growth rate. Keynesian economists predicted another Great Depression because of the two-thirds reduction in federal spending while the exact opposite happened. That should have discredited Keynesianism forever, but the Washington establishment just ignored or lied about this fact, as it does to this very day.

It took some seventy years, but the “mainstream” of the economics profession finally caught on to this truth, a truth that was recognized by Austrian School economists all along. In an August 2004 article in the prestigious Journal of Political Economy by Harold Cole and Lee Ohanian entitled “New Deal Policies and the Persistence of the Great Depression” the authors concluded that “New Deal . . . policies did not lift the economy out of the Depression . . . the abandonment of these policies coincided with the strong economic recovery of the 1940s” (emphasis added).

Nevertheless, the New Deal was a political power bonanza for FDR and his fellow Democrats. According to a 1938 Official Report of the U.S. Senate Committee on Campaign Expenditures it was routine for the Roosevelt administration to demand that recipients of government make-work jobs, of which there were millions, register and vote as Democrats. As Jim Couch and William Shughart wrote in The Political Economy of the New Deal, “The distribution of the billions of dollars appropriated by Congress to prime the economic pump was guided less by considerations of economic need than by the forces of ordinary politics.” For example, the nation’s number one economic problem was the South, but since the South was solidly Democratic it received relatively little New Deal spending compared to other regions where FDR needed the votes. And, “The states that gave Franklin Roosevelt larger percentages of the popular vote in 1932 were rewarded with significantly more federal aid than less-supportive constituencies.” What else would anyone expect?

Green Socialism - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Great stuff there.we were always taught that Hoover wrecked the economy but FDR saved us which is BS as that link proves,as we both know,he expanded what Hoover started.same as how Obama expanded whT bush got started.

Isn’t that most ironic?

FDR campaigned AGAINST government intervention in the economy, in 1932. He roundly condemned Hoover for his many interventions. Then he intervened much more than Hoover ever did.

Just as O condemned W, then did much like W.

Politicians never change, but somehow Americans get duped every time.

FDR campaigned AGAINST government intervention in the economy, in 1932.

Is that why FDR took US off the gold standard and demanded that gold coins be turned in or else face jail time? At that time a 20 dollar gold piece was worth 20 dollars, but once FDR took control, that 20 dollar gold piece(1 ounce of gold) was then worth 25 dollars. Did the gold get more valuable? No but the dollar shrunk by 25 percent. And then the rest is history, with gold almost 2000 dollars. You can thank a lib for that shit...

Now if you were only this objective on 9/11 and not ignore evidence and facts that explosives brought down the towers as I took you to school on recently.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Like so much of what is taught in government schools, the truth about Great Depression won’t be found there. This spells it out rather succinctly.



Failure of the New Deal

At the outset of the Great Depression, 1929, the unemployment rate in America was 2.9% according to U.S. Dept. of Commerce statistics. Unemployment reached its peak in 1933 at 24.9%. There was a bit of a recovery as mal-investments were liquidated, but it only dropped the unemployment rate to 14.3% by 1939. It rose to 19.0% in 1938 and was still 14.6% in 1940, on the eve of American entry into World War II. Personal consumption expenditures were still lower in 1940 ($71.9 billion) than in 1929 ($78.9 billion). All of this despite eight years of unprecedented New Deal “stimulus spending,” regulating, controlling, subsidizing, lending, inflating, price-controlling, and taxing. The New Deal was an utter failure to the American people. Economists Richard Vedder and Lowell Gallaway estimated in their book, Out of Work, that the unemployment rate was eight percentage points higher in 1940 than it otherwise would have been without New Deal minimum-wage and pro-union legislation alone.

Nor did World War II end the Great Depression. It ended high unemployment only because some 16 million men were sent overseas during the war. Sending a man to die in a foxhole in Germany is not the same as that man going to work in his own country and returning home to have dinner with his family every evening, contrary to Keynesian folklore about how the war supposedly “ended the Great Depression.” The average American family back at home was even worse off because of the massive diversion of resources from the consumer and business side of the economy to the government’s military infrastructure. The production of new automobiles and other products was made illegal, food was rationed, and everyone sacrificed even more.

The Great Depression did not really end until after the war was over and the army was demobilized, returning billions of dollars of resources to the private sector. Federal government expenditures fell from $98.4 billion in 1945 to $33 billion in 1948. As a result, the year 1946 was the most prosperous year in all of American history in terms of the growth of the private components of GDP: private consumption and investment spending increased by 30% in that one year; no other year has ever been remotely close to that growth rate. Keynesian economists predicted another Great Depression because of the two-thirds reduction in federal spending while the exact opposite happened. That should have discredited Keynesianism forever, but the Washington establishment just ignored or lied about this fact, as it does to this very day.

It took some seventy years, but the “mainstream” of the economics profession finally caught on to this truth, a truth that was recognized by Austrian School economists all along. In an August 2004 article in the prestigious Journal of Political Economy by Harold Cole and Lee Ohanian entitled “New Deal Policies and the Persistence of the Great Depression” the authors concluded that “New Deal . . . policies did not lift the economy out of the Depression . . . the abandonment of these policies coincided with the strong economic recovery of the 1940s” (emphasis added).

Nevertheless, the New Deal was a political power bonanza for FDR and his fellow Democrats. According to a 1938 Official Report of the U.S. Senate Committee on Campaign Expenditures it was routine for the Roosevelt administration to demand that recipients of government make-work jobs, of which there were millions, register and vote as Democrats. As Jim Couch and William Shughart wrote in The Political Economy of the New Deal, “The distribution of the billions of dollars appropriated by Congress to prime the economic pump was guided less by considerations of economic need than by the forces of ordinary politics.” For example, the nation’s number one economic problem was the South, but since the South was solidly Democratic it received relatively little New Deal spending compared to other regions where FDR needed the votes. And, “The states that gave Franklin Roosevelt larger percentages of the popular vote in 1932 were rewarded with significantly more federal aid than less-supportive constituencies.” What else would anyone expect?

Green Socialism - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Great stuff there.we were always taught that Hoover wrecked the economy but FDR saved us which is BS as that link proves,as we both know,he expanded what Hoover started.same as how Obama expanded whT bush got started.

Isn’t that most ironic?

FDR campaigned AGAINST government intervention in the economy, in 1932. He roundly condemned Hoover for his many interventions. Then he intervened much more than Hoover ever did.

Just as O condemned W, then did much like W.

Politicians never change, but somehow Americans get duped every time.

Amen to that,nothing has changed a single bit sense then yet the sheep incredibly after all these years,fall for it thinking there is a difference in our corrupt two party system unable to put the clues together that in reality,it is a ONE party system designed to look like two.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Like so much of what is taught in government schools, the truth about Great Depression won’t be found there. This spells it out rather succinctly.



Failure of the New Deal

At the outset of the Great Depression, 1929, the unemployment rate in America was 2.9% according to U.S. Dept. of Commerce statistics. Unemployment reached its peak in 1933 at 24.9%. There was a bit of a recovery as mal-investments were liquidated, but it only dropped the unemployment rate to 14.3% by 1939. It rose to 19.0% in 1938 and was still 14.6% in 1940, on the eve of American entry into World War II. Personal consumption expenditures were still lower in 1940 ($71.9 billion) than in 1929 ($78.9 billion). All of this despite eight years of unprecedented New Deal “stimulus spending,” regulating, controlling, subsidizing, lending, inflating, price-controlling, and taxing. The New Deal was an utter failure to the American people. Economists Richard Vedder and Lowell Gallaway estimated in their book, Out of Work, that the unemployment rate was eight percentage points higher in 1940 than it otherwise would have been without New Deal minimum-wage and pro-union legislation alone.

Nor did World War II end the Great Depression. It ended high unemployment only because some 16 million men were sent overseas during the war. Sending a man to die in a foxhole in Germany is not the same as that man going to work in his own country and returning home to have dinner with his family every evening, contrary to Keynesian folklore about how the war supposedly “ended the Great Depression.” The average American family back at home was even worse off because of the massive diversion of resources from the consumer and business side of the economy to the government’s military infrastructure. The production of new automobiles and other products was made illegal, food was rationed, and everyone sacrificed even more.

The Great Depression did not really end until after the war was over and the army was demobilized, returning billions of dollars of resources to the private sector. Federal government expenditures fell from $98.4 billion in 1945 to $33 billion in 1948. As a result, the year 1946 was the most prosperous year in all of American history in terms of the growth of the private components of GDP: private consumption and investment spending increased by 30% in that one year; no other year has ever been remotely close to that growth rate. Keynesian economists predicted another Great Depression because of the two-thirds reduction in federal spending while the exact opposite happened. That should have discredited Keynesianism forever, but the Washington establishment just ignored or lied about this fact, as it does to this very day.

It took some seventy years, but the “mainstream” of the economics profession finally caught on to this truth, a truth that was recognized by Austrian School economists all along. In an August 2004 article in the prestigious Journal of Political Economy by Harold Cole and Lee Ohanian entitled “New Deal Policies and the Persistence of the Great Depression” the authors concluded that “New Deal . . . policies did not lift the economy out of the Depression . . . the abandonment of these policies coincided with the strong economic recovery of the 1940s” (emphasis added).

Nevertheless, the New Deal was a political power bonanza for FDR and his fellow Democrats. According to a 1938 Official Report of the U.S. Senate Committee on Campaign Expenditures it was routine for the Roosevelt administration to demand that recipients of government make-work jobs, of which there were millions, register and vote as Democrats. As Jim Couch and William Shughart wrote in The Political Economy of the New Deal, “The distribution of the billions of dollars appropriated by Congress to prime the economic pump was guided less by considerations of economic need than by the forces of ordinary politics.” For example, the nation’s number one economic problem was the South, but since the South was solidly Democratic it received relatively little New Deal spending compared to other regions where FDR needed the votes. And, “The states that gave Franklin Roosevelt larger percentages of the popular vote in 1932 were rewarded with significantly more federal aid than less-supportive constituencies.” What else would anyone expect?

Green Socialism - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Great stuff there.we were always taught that Hoover wrecked the economy but FDR saved us which is BS as that link proves,as we both know,he expanded what Hoover started.same as how Obama expanded whT bush got started.

Isn’t that most ironic?

FDR campaigned AGAINST government intervention in the economy, in 1932. He roundly condemned Hoover for his many interventions. Then he intervened much more than Hoover ever did.

Just as O condemned W, then did much like W.

Politicians never change, but somehow Americans get duped every time.

FDR campaigned AGAINST government intervention in the economy, in 1932.

Is that why FDR took US off the gold standard and demanded that gold coins be turned in or else face jail time? At that time a 20 dollar gold piece was worth 20 dollars, but once FDR took control, that 20 dollar gold piece(1 ounce of gold) was then worth 25 dollars. Did the gold get more valuable? No but the dollar shrunk by 25 percent. And then the rest is history, with gold almost 2000 dollars. You can thank a lib for that shit...

Now if you were only this objective on 9/11 and not ignore evidence and facts that explosives brought down the towers as I took you to school on recently.

Explosives that brought down the towers? Are you fucking kidding me? I guess you dont know the theory of thermal dynamics, where a certain temperature reached can melt metal? Congratulations on being a graduate of public education....

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Like so much of what is taught in government schools, the truth about Great Depression won’t be found there. This spells it out rather succinctly.



Failure of the New Deal

At the outset of the Great Depression, 1929, the unemployment rate in America was 2.9% according to U.S. Dept. of Commerce statistics. Unemployment reached its peak in 1933 at 24.9%. There was a bit of a recovery as mal-investments were liquidated, but it only dropped the unemployment rate to 14.3% by 1939. It rose to 19.0% in 1938 and was still 14.6% in 1940, on the eve of American entry into World War II. Personal consumption expenditures were still lower in 1940 ($71.9 billion) than in 1929 ($78.9 billion). All of this despite eight years of unprecedented New Deal “stimulus spending,” regulating, controlling, subsidizing, lending, inflating, price-controlling, and taxing. The New Deal was an utter failure to the American people. Economists Richard Vedder and Lowell Gallaway estimated in their book, Out of Work, that the unemployment rate was eight percentage points higher in 1940 than it otherwise would have been without New Deal minimum-wage and pro-union legislation alone.

Nor did World War II end the Great Depression. It ended high unemployment only because some 16 million men were sent overseas during the war. Sending a man to die in a foxhole in Germany is not the same as that man going to work in his own country and returning home to have dinner with his family every evening, contrary to Keynesian folklore about how the war supposedly “ended the Great Depression.” The average American family back at home was even worse off because of the massive diversion of resources from the consumer and business side of the economy to the government’s military infrastructure. The production of new automobiles and other products was made illegal, food was rationed, and everyone sacrificed even more.

The Great Depression did not really end until after the war was over and the army was demobilized, returning billions of dollars of resources to the private sector. Federal government expenditures fell from $98.4 billion in 1945 to $33 billion in 1948. As a result, the year 1946 was the most prosperous year in all of American history in terms of the growth of the private components of GDP: private consumption and investment spending increased by 30% in that one year; no other year has ever been remotely close to that growth rate. Keynesian economists predicted another Great Depression because of the two-thirds reduction in federal spending while the exact opposite happened. That should have discredited Keynesianism forever, but the Washington establishment just ignored or lied about this fact, as it does to this very day.

It took some seventy years, but the “mainstream” of the economics profession finally caught on to this truth, a truth that was recognized by Austrian School economists all along. In an August 2004 article in the prestigious Journal of Political Economy by Harold Cole and Lee Ohanian entitled “New Deal Policies and the Persistence of the Great Depression” the authors concluded that “New Deal . . . policies did not lift the economy out of the Depression . . . the abandonment of these policies coincided with the strong economic recovery of the 1940s” (emphasis added).

Nevertheless, the New Deal was a political power bonanza for FDR and his fellow Democrats. According to a 1938 Official Report of the U.S. Senate Committee on Campaign Expenditures it was routine for the Roosevelt administration to demand that recipients of government make-work jobs, of which there were millions, register and vote as Democrats. As Jim Couch and William Shughart wrote in The Political Economy of the New Deal, “The distribution of the billions of dollars appropriated by Congress to prime the economic pump was guided less by considerations of economic need than by the forces of ordinary politics.” For example, the nation’s number one economic problem was the South, but since the South was solidly Democratic it received relatively little New Deal spending compared to other regions where FDR needed the votes. And, “The states that gave Franklin Roosevelt larger percentages of the popular vote in 1932 were rewarded with significantly more federal aid than less-supportive constituencies.” What else would anyone expect?

Green Socialism - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

Great stuff there.we were always taught that Hoover wrecked the economy but FDR saved us which is BS as that link proves,as we both know,he expanded what Hoover started.same as how Obama expanded whT bush got started.

Isn’t that most ironic?

FDR campaigned AGAINST government intervention in the economy, in 1932. He roundly condemned Hoover for his many interventions. Then he intervened much more than Hoover ever did.

Just as O condemned W, then did much like W.

Politicians never change, but somehow Americans get duped every time.

Amen to that,nothing has changed a single bit sense then yet the sheep incredibly after all these years,fall for it thinking there is a difference in our corrupt two party system unable to put the clues together that in reality,it is a ONE party system designed to look like two.

Amen to that,nothing has changed a single bit sense then yet the sheep incredibly after all these years,

Begezuss, where the fuck did you go to school, your grammar and spelling is deplorable...

Amen to that, nothing has changed a single bit, since "then yet the sheep" incredibility after all these years. A normal person would have no clue what the fuck you are talking about...

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

This OP link is trash. Roosevelt was only a flexible far sighted capitalist politician willing to experiment when all the old nostrums failed. He succeeded in keeping the nation intact and preparing for the great struggle of WWII. Without the dignity and solidarity his New Deal provided, our country would have been utterly unprepared for the war, socially, morally or politically. Was he a perfect man? Far from it. Did his reforms end the Depression? Of course not. But he showed a democratic way forward that working people and common people appreciated. We did not have fascism or communism. He choose good advisors, for the most part.

My parents were of that Depression and war generation. I went to a High School built by New Deal workers. The unions that were established then continued to fight for decent wages after the war, creating a period when wage differences between CEOs and working men were closer than ever. Of course the Cold War changed much and gave an opportunity to reverse much. That is another story. Roosevelt as practical politician, Keynes as intellectual leader, pointed the way toward a compromise between capital and labor, rich and poor, that changed the world.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This OP link is trash. Roosevelt was only a flexible far sighted capitalist politician willing to experiment when all the old nostrums failed. He succeeded in keeping the nation intact and preparing for the great struggle of WWII. Without the dignity and solidarity his New Deal provided our country would have been utterly unprepared for the war, socially, morally or politically. Was he a perfect man? Far from it. Did his reforms end the Depression? Of course not. But he showed a democratic way forward that working people and the common people appreciated. We did not have fascism or communism. He choose good advisors, for the most part. My parents were of that Depression and war generation. I went to a High School built by New Deal workers. The unions that were established then continued to fight for decent wages after the war, creating a period when wage differences between CEOs and working men were closer than ever. Of course the Cold War changed much and gave an opportunity to reverse much. That is another story. Roosevelt as practical politician, Keynes as intellectual leader, pointed the way toward a compromise between capital and labor, rich and poor, that changed the world.

Stop. Just fucking stop. I read to the second sentence and it's pointless to read further. You're either stupid or lying, no third option available

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

This OP link is trash. Roosevelt was only a flexible far sighted capitalist politician willing to experiment when all the old nostrums failed. He succeeded in keeping the nation intact and preparing for the great struggle of WWII. Without the dignity and solidarity his New Deal provided our country would have been utterly unprepared for the war, socially, morally or politically. Was he a perfect man? Far from it. Did his reforms end the Depression? Of course not. But he showed a democratic way forward that working people and the common people appreciated. We did not have fascism or communism. He choose good advisors, for the most part. My parents were of that Depression and war generation. I went to a High School built by New Deal workers. The unions that were established then continued to fight for decent wages after the war, creating a period when wage differences between CEOs and working men were closer than ever. Of course the Cold War changed much and gave an opportunity to reverse much. That is another story. Roosevelt as practical politician, Keynes as intellectual leader, pointed the way toward a compromise between capital and labor, rich and poor, that changed the world.

Stop. Just fucking stop. I read to the second sentence and it's pointless to read further. You're either stupid or lying, no third option available

About what we would expect from somebody who recently wrote ... “Pinochet had the right idea.”

 

[gipper]

This OP link is trash. Roosevelt was only a flexible far sighted capitalist politician willing to experiment when all the old nostrums failed. He succeeded in keeping the nation intact and preparing for the great struggle of WWII. Without the dignity and solidarity his New Deal provided, our country would have been utterly unprepared for the war, socially, morally or politically. Was he a perfect man? Far from it. Did his reforms end the Depression? Of course not. But he showed a democratic way forward that working people and common people appreciated. We did not have fascism or communism. He choose good advisors, for the most part.

My parents were of that Depression and war generation. I went to a High School built by New Deal workers. The unions that were established then continued to fight for decent wages after the war, creating a period when wage differences between CEOs and working men were closer than ever. Of course the Cold War changed much and gave an opportunity to reverse much. That is another story. Roosevelt as practical politician, Keynes as intellectual leader, pointed the way toward a compromise between capital and labor, rich and poor, that changed the world.

Yes FDR did some good things, after all he was in office for better than three terms. However, his constant and amateurish economic policies prolonged the GD. His focus was on trying to raise prices, while Americans were out of work and starving. He thought scarcity would do this. Dumb. Very dumb.

As the column in the OP points out, he was very political in his everything he did. The southern states suffered greatly during the GD, but FDR knew they were locked up D states. So he did little to help them.

Secondly, he campaigned in 1940 saying multiple times, no American boys would go to war. All the while covertly assisting the Brits, trying to incite the Germans to attack US shipping, and refusing to trade with Japan. He was actively and secretively working for war.

His administration was full of Soviet spies, in which he was warned about many times, yet did nothing. He gave enormous amounts of war materiel to Stalin, while US troops were poorly provisioned early in the war.

His unconditional surrender requirement of Germany and Japan caused thousands of needless deaths and prolonged the war.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

However, his constant and amateurish economic policies prolonged the GD. His focus was on trying to raise prices, while Americans were out of work and starving. He thought scarcity would do this. Dumb. Very dumb.

Actually this is typical ideologically-founded American conservative economic and historical nonsense. Once faddish and even cultish “Libertarian” revisionism. Like the cardboard cutout criticisms of Keynesianism once so faddish in mainstream Republican circles — which Republicans still do not openly reject even as they use fiat money and state capitalist measures to protect their bankrupt “world conquering” empire — the “political economy” of The Ludwig von Mises Institute is less applicable to today’s real economic world than it was in the days of the Great Depression and crisis of world capitalism in the 1930s.

Thomas DiLorenzo is a senior fellow of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, but really just a political propagandist and fantasist, as the first paragraphs of his article make clear. He writes books like The Problem with Lincoln, which starts out with the amazingly original revelation that Lincoln was not always a popular President. Roosevelt, like Lincoln, is rightly considered a transformative American president, who personally managed to rise above the norm of his times to meet incredible problems, problems of U.S. and world capitalism deeply rooted in historical developments. Were these men perfect? No. Did they solve forever the deep problems they confronted? No. Did the solutions they adopt create new problems? Yes. Are there myths about both of them? Sure. Is Keynesianism a final answer to all economic problems of modern capitalism. Damn no.

But each man met challenges that lesser men could not have overcome, preserved our flawed but valuable republican “democracy,” and extended to many the promise of a better world. For that they won the admiration and respect of the world in their own time, and forever.

It is easy to tear them down to meet present partisan ideological — I would say ultimately profoundly reactionary — needs.

 

[rightwinger]

So what was the Republican plan for the Great Depression? America elected Hoover first and so his plan was put into operation. What was Hoover's plan?

Hoover’s plan was.....Prosperity is just around the corner
Wait it out and it will resolve itself

FDR understood that people were suffering. We needed to do what was necessary to help the people first. The rest would follow