Roosevelt's Great Depression

[NYcarbineer]

6. Maybe the stock market improved?

Nope. The value of all stocks dropped almost half from 1937-1939

7. Harding had cut federal spending big time! FDR? The United States had budget surpluses in 1930 and 1931, with a $16 billion dollar national debt in 1931. By the end of the decade the debt had ballooned to over $40 billion.


Guess which economic whiz ballooned the current debt to over $18 TRILLION?
Can't imagine who the morons were who voted for this wind bag.



a. From 1776 to 1931, the spending to support seven wars and at least five recessions was more than offset by the debt of Roosevelt's regime. Amazing? In less than a decade the financial wizardry of Franklin the First, said debt grew more than in the previous 150 years.
Folsom, Op. Cit.

Harding cut spending after WWI ended? lol, stop the presses.

 

[NYcarbineer]

6. Maybe the stock market improved?

Nope. The value of all stocks dropped almost half from 1937-1939

.

Once again PC crafts a lie.

The stock market bottoms 3 months from FDR's inauguration, and trends higher from there on.

Now, why, PC would you lie about that?

 

[PoliticalChic]

"This thread is not about Hoover, you dunce. Cut to the chase: did FDR's economic policies shorten the depression?"

You have to compare it with Hoover's inadequacy to get an in-context answer.

No one doesn't.

One simply must be fearlessly honest.

That leaves you out.

 

[NYcarbineer]

"This thread is not about Hoover, you dunce. Cut to the chase: did FDR's economic policies shorten the depression?"

You have to compare it with Hoover's inadequacy to get an in-context answer.

No one doesn't.

One simply must be fearlessly honest.

That leaves you out.

Tell us why you lied about the stock market.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Being as PC loves to go back in history and berate past presidents or nationalities, I'm shocked she hasn't started a thread berating Grover Cleveland or the Inca Empire yet.
Well, PC, here's a head start for you.
Grover Cleveland - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Inca Empire - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

No, you moron...Cleveland is one of my favs.

Unlike those who shredded the Constitution.....i.e., Franklin Roosevelt.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

FDR: Worst economy ever, worse than the 7 Biblical Lean Years

 

[kiwiman127]

"This thread is not about Hoover, you dunce. Cut to the chase: did FDR's economic policies shorten the depression?"

You have to compare it with Hoover's inadequacy to get an in-context answer.

No one doesn't.

One simply must be fearlessly honest.

That leaves you out.

Being as biased as yourself, isn't being objective at all and is that really honest?

 

[PoliticalChic]

"This thread is not about Hoover, you dunce. Cut to the chase: did FDR's economic policies shorten the depression?"

You have to compare it with Hoover's inadequacy to get an in-context answer.

No one doesn't.

One simply must be fearlessly honest.

That leaves you out.

Being as biased as yourself, isn't being objective at all and is that really honest?

As joke goes, 'racist' is a conservative winning the argument.

It seems you have a similar way of defining 'biased.'

 

[PoliticalChic]

8. While the United States had a spirituality, a certain religious element, in its founding.....Roosevelt lacked same. This accounts for willingness to accept atheistic, materialist Marxism with barely a shrug.
And, as with Marxist, he never understood the catastrophic results that came with the increases of unemployment during his regime.

a. The suicide rate remained high throughout Roosevelt's tenure. And deaths due to accidental fall, reckless driving and being hit by a train all hit record numbers of deaths per capita during the New Deal years.
"Down and Out in the Great Depression: Letters from the Forgotten Man," by Robert S. McElvaine, p.103-104



b. "Mass unemployment can be a frightening spectacle. When a working-age person has meaningful daily tasks—making a cappuccino, laying bricks, creating spreadsheets—his mind is active and occupied. He also has income, which means food on the table, a roof overhead, clothed children and a hopeful future. The employed mind tends to be happier, more stable, more content, more confident.

Take away employment, and two things begin to happen psychologically: First, as his bills mount and his stomach aches, the unemployed person becomes stressed and frustrated. As the situation persists, the anxiety evolves into desperation, hopelessness, even despair. Second, disenfranchised by his deteriorating circumstances—the loss of the family home, his decline in status, marital tension—the unemployed person can become emotionally and mentally vulnerable.

.... unemployment stops being merely an unfortunate economic issue and becomes an alarming social and political crisis that can lead to major..."
An Army Waiting for a Leader - theTrumpet.com

Welfare is no substitute for gainful employment.

c. "Man living on benefits killed wife of 32 years after being overcome by 'hopelessness'
An unemployed man stabbed to death his wife of 32 years because he felt their life on benefits was meaningless and they had nothing to do other than watch television.
He said: "They both felt their lives had no worth. He says that the difference between a bad day and a good day was if there was something on television they were both interested in, usually sport."
Man living on benefits killed wife of 32 years after being overcome by hopelessness - Telegraph

 

[regent]

8. While the United States had a spirituality, a certain religious element, in its founding.....Roosevelt lacked same. This accounts for willingness to accept atheistic, materialist Marxism with barely a shrug.
And, as with Marxist, he never understood the catastrophic results that came with the increases of unemployment during his regime.

a. The suicide rate remained high throughout Roosevelt's tenure. And deaths due to accidental fall, reckless driving and being hit by a train all hit record numbers of deaths per capita during the New Deal years.
"Down and Out in the Great Depression: Letters from the Forgotten Man," by Robert S. McElvaine, p.103-104



b. "Mass unemployment can be a frightening spectacle. When a working-age person has meaningful daily tasks—making a cappuccino, laying bricks, creating spreadsheets—his mind is active and occupied. He also has income, which means food on the table, a roof overhead, clothed children and a hopeful future. The employed mind tends to be happier, more stable, more content, more confident.

Take away employment, and two things begin to happen psychologically: First, as his bills mount and his stomach aches, the unemployed person becomes stressed and frustrated. As the situation persists, the anxiety evolves into desperation, hopelessness, even despair. Second, disenfranchised by his deteriorating circumstances—the loss of the family home, his decline in status, marital tension—the unemployed person can become emotionally and mentally vulnerable.

.... unemployment stops being merely an unfortunate economic issue and becomes an alarming social and political crisis that can lead to major..."
An Army Waiting for a Leader - theTrumpet.com

Welfare is no substitute for gainful employment.

c. "Man living on benefits killed wife of 32 years after being overcome by 'hopelessness'
An unemployed man stabbed to death his wife of 32 years because he felt their life on benefits was meaningless and they had nothing to do other than watch television.
He said: "They both felt their lives had no worth. He says that the difference between a bad day and a good day was if there was something on television they were both interested in, usually sport."
Man living on benefits killed wife of 32 years after being overcome by hopelessness - Telegraph

Well that's why FDR had work programs, work programs that improved America at the same time as providing jobs. Those work programs produced a thousand miles of airport runways, 651,000 miles of highways, 124,000 bridges, 18,000 playgrounds, 125,000 public buildings, 41,000 schools, and on and on.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Perhaps Lincoln's presidency has been studied more, but by this time, FDR's period has been researched to death by both liberals and conservatives, enough times to draw some conclusions about that epic in American history. There were no manuals on curing depressions at that time, (is there today?) and as FDR said we would try things, and he did. Not all were successful, and today an author can take those failures, make a book, and make conservatives feel better. Still for conservatives, FDR has got to be hard to take, I mean all historians rate him at least third best president; those that lived through that period elected him four times and would probably be electing him still today, even Reagan voted for him. That's gotta hurt conservatives.

Sorry, were you not aware of the 1920-21 Depression?

Harding and Coolidge ended it in 18 months, not 7 years and they didn't need Hitler to start WWII end it either

 

[kiwiman127]

"This thread is not about Hoover, you dunce. Cut to the chase: did FDR's economic policies shorten the depression?"

You have to compare it with Hoover's inadequacy to get an in-context answer.

No one doesn't.

One simply must be fearlessly honest.

That leaves you out.

Being as biased as yourself, isn't being objective at all and is that really honest?

As joke goes, 'racist' is a conservative winning the argument.

It seems you have a similar way of defining 'biased.'

Are you claiming to be unbiased?
I'll tell you what, as I'm a fair minded type of guy, prove it by showing five threads of yours, that are directed negatively towards the right. Oh and renounced Ann Coulter while you're at it!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

FDR was "Great" because:

1. Marxist history professors told me so
2. I reviewed the record and find 7 year Depression to be awesome. What can I say, I have low standards for greatness

 

[PoliticalChic]

"This thread is not about Hoover, you dunce. Cut to the chase: did FDR's economic policies shorten the depression?"

You have to compare it with Hoover's inadequacy to get an in-context answer.

No one doesn't.

One simply must be fearlessly honest.

That leaves you out.

Being as biased as yourself, isn't being objective at all and is that really honest?

As joke goes, 'racist' is a conservative winning the argument.

It seems you have a similar way of defining 'biased.'

Are you claiming to be unbiased?

I'm indicating that the term has no bearing in the discussion, as I provide links, quotes and documentation.

Get it, dope?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Not only did the "great" FDR extend the depression....but his results fell behind that of nations not ruled by the "great" FDR.


9. Roosevelt groupies might contend that it that Franklin Roosevelt wasn't a poor manager, after all, wasn't the Depression a worldwide phenomenon???


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.

 

[kiwiman127]

Perhaps Lincoln's presidency has been studied more, but by this time, FDR's period has been researched to death by both liberals and conservatives, enough times to draw some conclusions about that epic in American history. There were no manuals on curing depressions at that time, (is there today?) and as FDR said we would try things, and he did. Not all were successful, and today an author can take those failures, make a book, and make conservatives feel better. Still for conservatives, FDR has got to be hard to take, I mean all historians rate him at least third best president; those that lived through that period elected him four times and would probably be electing him still today, even Reagan voted for him. That's gotta hurt conservatives.

Sorry, were you not aware of the 1920-21 Depression?

Harding and Coolidge ended it in 18 months, not 7 years and they didn't need Hitler to start WWII end it either

Frank, the recession of 1920-21 and the Great Depression were as different as night and day.
The Great Depression was worldwide, the recession of 1920-21 wasn't.
Because the 20-21 recession wasn't world wide, demand of American made goods by those countries not in a recession basically saved the US's ass.
Also, during the 20-21 recession, consumption levels remained fairly level but things were greatly different regarding the Great Depression. The same goes for investment levels. (See graphs)
Comparing the recession of 20-21 to the Great Depression is like comparing the recession of 2001 and the Great Recession of 2007. In neither care are they comparable, it's not even close.

 

[kiwiman127]

"This thread is not about Hoover, you dunce. Cut to the chase: did FDR's economic policies shorten the depression?"

You have to compare it with Hoover's inadequacy to get an in-context answer.

No one doesn't.

One simply must be fearlessly honest.

That leaves you out.

Being as biased as yourself, isn't being objective at all and is that really honest?

As joke goes, 'racist' is a conservative winning the argument.

It seems you have a similar way of defining 'biased.'

Are you claiming to be unbiased?

I'm indicating that the term has no bearing in the discussion, as I provide links, quotes and documentation.

Get it, dope?

Anyone can cherry pick their "facts".
Also, you keep calling me names, which is a clear sign that you are getting desperate. Please note the absence of malice on my part and learn something.
Well, I'm on my way to the gym to better myself and to help America hold down the cost of healthcare.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Perhaps Lincoln's presidency has been studied more, but by this time, FDR's period has been researched to death by both liberals and conservatives, enough times to draw some conclusions about that epic in American history. There were no manuals on curing depressions at that time, (is there today?) and as FDR said we would try things, and he did. Not all were successful, and today an author can take those failures, make a book, and make conservatives feel better. Still for conservatives, FDR has got to be hard to take, I mean all historians rate him at least third best president; those that lived through that period elected him four times and would probably be electing him still today, even Reagan voted for him. That's gotta hurt conservatives.

Sorry, were you not aware of the 1920-21 Depression?

Harding and Coolidge ended it in 18 months, not 7 years and they didn't need Hitler to start WWII end it either

Frank, the recession of 1920-21 and the Great Depression were as different as night and day.
The Great Depression was worldwide, the recession of 1920-21 wasn't.
Because the 20-21 recession wasn't world wide, demand of American made goods by those countries not in a recession basically saved the US's ass.
Also, during the 20-21 recession, consumption levels remained fairly level but things were greatly different regarding the Great Depression. The same goes for investment levels. (See graphs)
Comparing the recession of 20-21 to the Great Depression is like comparing the recession of 2001 and the Great Recession of 2007. In neither care are they comparable, it's not even close.
View attachment 35759 View attachment 35760

"The decline in the GNP price deflator from 1920 to 1921 is the largest one-year percentage decline in the series in the more than 120 years covered.

Various estimates show that one-year deflation figures were 18 percent, 13.0 percent, and 14.8 percent, respectively.

Wholesale prices declined by 36.8 percent for 1920-21, the largest one-year decline on record, going back at least to the American Revolutionary War period.

The 1921 deflation contains another striking feature. Not only was it sharp, it was large relative to the accompanying decline in real product. The ratio of the percentage decline in the GNP deflator for 1920-21 to the percentage decline in real GNP is 2.6 using the Department of Commerce figures.

By contrast, during 1929-30, the first year of the Great Depression, the GNP deflator declined by 2.7 percent and real GNP by 9.4 percent, for a ratio of 0.3. The ratios of the percentage decline in GNP prices to the percentage decline in real GNP for 1930-31, 1931-32, 1932-33, and 1937-38, the other Great Depression years in which real GNP declined, were 1.0, 0.9, 1.2, and 0.3, respectively, all well below the 1920-21 figures."
http://www.n-philes.com/forums/showpost.php?p=50819272&postcount=1

 

[rightwinger]

Republican deregulation and hands off economic policies gave us the Great Depression

We didn't elect another Republican for 20 years

George Bushs deregulation and hands off economic policies gave us the Great Bush Recession

It will be over 20 years before we elect another Republican

 

[PoliticalChic]

No one doesn't.

One simply must be fearlessly honest.

That leaves you out.

Being as biased as yourself, isn't being objective at all and is that really honest?

As joke goes, 'racist' is a conservative winning the argument.

It seems you have a similar way of defining 'biased.'

Are you claiming to be unbiased?

I'm indicating that the term has no bearing in the discussion, as I provide links, quotes and documentation.

Get it, dope?

Anyone can cherry pick their "facts".
Also, you keep calling me names, which is a clear sign that you are getting desperate. Please note the absence of malice on my part and learn something.

Names?

Any of them inaccurate?