|
|
Post by jgaffney on Mar 12, 2009 15:31:05 GMT -5
If it wasn't for FDR, America would have gone the way of the dodo.
Despite the multiple studies by respected economists that prove that FDR's policies extended, rather than ended, the Great Depression, you continue to cling to this tenent of the Democrat faith. Isn't it time for the Democrats to get over FDR? |
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Mar 12, 2009 15:45:24 GMT -5
If it wasn't for FDR, America would have gone the way of the dodo.
Despite the multiple studies by respected economists that prove that FDR's policies extended, rather than ended, the Great Depression, you continue to cling to this tenent of the Democrat faith. Isn't it time for the Democrats to get over FDR? Well, moondog's "respected economist" turned out to be nothing more than an opinionated history professor. Lets see what you've got to back up your claim? It is widely accepted by almost every that FDR is one of the greatest American Presidents and that his programs got us out of the Great Depression. Is this valid enough for you? According to Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke, "Only with the New Deal's rehabilitation of the financial system in 1933-35 did the economy begin its slow emergence from the Great Depression." In fact, even famed conservative economist Milton Friedman admitted that the New Deal's Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. was "the structural change most conducive to monetary stability since ... the Civil War." Please read this column and tell me you still want to spew your bullcrap: www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2009/01/02/sirota_fdr_depression/ |
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Mar 12, 2009 16:18:58 GMT -5
Too bad the only jobs created were when we went to war. The New Deal was a failure.
Does that mean nothing good came out of that era, no. It just means that deficit spending is a path to destruction. A path began by the Democrats who now rail against their own creation.
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Mar 12, 2009 16:27:07 GMT -5
Too bad the only jobs created were when we went to war. The New Deal was a failure. Does that mean nothing good came out of that era, no. It just means that deficit spending is a path to destruction. A path began by the Democrats who now rail against their own creation. Wrong! You are not addressing anything in my post. Face it, you're wrong on this one. |
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Mar 12, 2009 17:26:42 GMT -5
I am not going to attack you. I will simply say that Henry Morgenthau is on record in Washington DC as giving testimony to Congress that they have spent more money then in the history of the Nation and it simply did not work. They had same unemployment rate the year before the war as they did when FDR took office six years prior to that testimony.
Now, you can say what ever you like. I will not resort to diatribe. But, the facts speak for themselves, if you choose to ignore them or misinterpret them, I can do nothing about that. However, that does not change the facts or the testimony of the very man who was responsible for those figures.
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Mar 12, 2009 17:41:03 GMT -5
this is exactly how democrats see everything......tit for tat. "they did it so why can't we do it?" silly.
while i'm not a bob barr fan i would ask you the same question.
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Mar 12, 2009 17:43:51 GMT -5
Obama has taken immediate action. He passed a huge stimulus bill to get people back to work.
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Mar 12, 2009 18:08:10 GMT -5
wow! i'm so impressed i think there is a tingly feeling creeping up my leg. i should now bow down in front of him and sing his praises!
he didn't pass jack shit. he didn't design, develop, nor write jack shit. princess p and prince harry did that along with a willing crew of congressional sheeple.
and in case you haven't noticed he is losing his coveted popularity because of his actions so far.
|
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Mar 12, 2009 18:29:37 GMT -5
In his article Barr rips the current stimulus plan but he offers no alternative solution to the crisis. Why would you vote for a guy who offers no ideas or solutions. Because the stimulus was not a solution. Of course this can only be proven when our economy goes through its boom bust cycle one more time, because that is exactly what this stimulus bill is going to cause, a boom bust cycle. Here, Sheldon Richman explains it much better then I can: Roosevelt was quite a tax enthusiast. He levied or raised taxes on liquor, tobacco, gasoline, corporate dividends, estates, incomes (top rate 75 percent versus Hoover’s 63), “excess” profits, and undistributed profits. (The last tax was repealed in 1939.) And then there was the payroll tax that came in with Social Security. All in all, the New Deal more than tripled the tax burden from 1933 to 1940 raising it from $1.6 billion to $5.3 billion. Serious deficit-spenders don’t raise taxes. But Roosevelt did. Is it any wonder that net investment dropped $3.1 billion during the decade or that unemployment was about as high in 1939 as it was in 1932?
This raises the question of whether big-time deficit spending would have ended the Depression. Krugman and others think so. But how could it have done so? Deficits are financed either by borrowing or by creating money out of nothing. When the government borrows money, that’s money no one else can borrow and invest. Where’s the gain? Moreover, the money is put to purposes selected by politicians, not entrepreneurs trying to please consumers.
When the government creates money, three things happen. First, the new money lowers interest rates below the level justified by society’s time preference; that creates perverse incentives to invest in longer-term projects far from the consumer-goods level. Second, the money changes relative prices (rather than raising prices evenly) because particular economic interests get it earlier than everyone else. Third, prices later rise generally, reducing everyone’s purchasing power. The result is a distorted structure of production and a boom that is unsustainable because it is based not on real savings but on fiat money. When the inflation stops, the bust follows.
Since the New Deal didn’t end the Depression and a New Deal on steroids wouldn’t have done so, President Obama should pay no heed to Krugman and his Keynesian economic advisers. The way to wake up the economy is reduce the total government burden on producers and consumers by, among other things, slashing spending, taxes, and borrowing.Story SourceOf course it is about the FDR era, but it applies to today just as well. |
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Mar 12, 2009 18:33:22 GMT -5
So you're still touting the history teacher's opinion over the opinions of such respected economists as Ben Bernanke and (conservative) Milton Friedman?
|
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Mar 12, 2009 19:06:26 GMT -5
Ahem, Milton Freedman was a published and hosted by the FEE. And the above post was from a piece done by Sheldon Richmon.
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Mar 12, 2009 19:17:45 GMT -5
Aha, then you realize that Milton Friedman is a recipient of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences. He is best known among scholars for his theoretical and empirical research, especially consumption analysis, monetary history and theory, and for his demonstration of the complexity of stabilization policy. In other words, a real, legit, and highly regarded economist.
|
|
