Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The posts about the Great Depression - does anyone know where we got the money for the basic materials to start up the war effort, if we were in a recession in 1938? Couldnt have been taxes. I dont know where to look this up efficiently - help?
Not related but interesting at wikipedia about the home front during the war. I bolded the part that I think is probably most relevant to my search:
Federal tax policy was highly contentious during the war, with Roosevelt battling a conservative Congress. Everyone agreed on the need for high taxes to pay for the war. Roosevelt tried to impose a 100% tax on incomes over $25,000 (which failed to pass), while Congress enlarged the base downward. By 1944 nearly every employed person was paying federal income taxes (compared to 10% in 1940).
Many controls were put on the economy.The most important were price controls, imposed on most products and monitored by the OPA. Wages were also controlled. In addition, the military imposed priorities that largely shaped industrial production.[1][2]
I dont understand that "100% tax " - uncaught wiki-error?
Economists say stimulus won’t work | Mound City Money | STLtoday (http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/mound-city-money/us-economy/2009/01/economists-say-stimulus-wont-work/ - broken link)
Of course, the dems and obama know that full well but are going full steam ahead to try and "change" from a capitalist republic to a socialist one. This is their opportunity (when the economy is in the tank) to implement their liberal, socialist policies. Take note of the bold - we have been here before - what the dems and obama are trying to do has been shown to be a failure.
Klugman who won the Nobel Prize for economics said that the path they are following is the right path. He believes we are already in a DEPRESSION and job growth is the only way out and tax cuts won't help at all! He actually believes that The President should be more aggresive in job growth and that dragging our feet is a BIG MISTAKE, because it may already be TOO LATE! Thanks George for the mess you left us with!
He writes a for the NY times-check it out. A Noble Prize for Economics- I THINK WE SHOULD LISTEN TO HIM!
Last edited by EllenArlingtonPark; 02-02-2009 at 07:37 PM..
Reason: TYPO addl info
Klugman who won the Nobel Prize for economics said that the path they are following is the right path. He believes we are already in a DEPRESSION and job growth is the only way out and tax cuts won't help at all! He actually believes that The President should be more aggresive in job growth and that dragging our feet is a BIG MISTAKE, because it may already be TOO LATE! Thanks George for the mess you left us with!
He writes a for the NY times-check it out. A Noble Prize for Economics- I THINK WE SHOULD LISTEN TO HIM!
Krugman? And he is about the most spend happy dude out there and probably the only one talking about spending up to 5-10 trillion if need be. Even as he was willing to admit his policies didn't do much until we went into WWII. After the war there wasn't a truly competitive country in terms of trade leaving us as the monopoly.
The posts about the Great Depression - does anyone know where we got the money for the basic materials to start up the war effort, if we were in a recession in 1938? Couldnt have been taxes.
War bonds and taxes.
"Since the estimate is that WWII fiscal policies accounted for 81.3% of the 1941 increase in real GNP, very little of the recovery is left to be explained by monetary policies. Money growth was very rapid and volatile during World War II. The high government expenditures caused by the purchasing of wartime supplies was financed by the Treasury issueing bonds. The Fed helped the Treasury by pegging interest rates at low levels. When the interest rate would rise, the Fed would make an open market purchase to drive the interest rate down. This increase in the money supply brings the rate back down to the pegged rate. These government expenditures were financed by taxes and "war bonds". Because of the massive increase in government spending, which was much higher than the collected taxes, the budget deficit rose substantially during war."
I respect your views as well. Mr Obama is my president now and I hope that he does whats for the good of the country. I was not a W fan by far, but he was my president then and I hoped the same with him.
The information that I know about is from my parents and grandparents who were business people during the depression. There are other facts I have learned through federal government records, but I am not an expert on the New Deal. It is still very clear to me that by looking at the records, you will see that the unemployment rate did improve. We were still in double digit unemployment however and we ended up in another recession in 1937 with unemployment going up to 19%. It was a fact that the war pulled us out of the depression.
I recently read (probably one of the links in this thread) that 1937 recession occurred mysteriously around the same time Roosevelt stopped spending in order to balance the budget.
And I do agree with you about the war - 17 million jobs created. This stimulus won't do that well, but the high end estimates by CBO are nearly 8 million jobs over the next 3 years. Course, the low estimate is closer to 3 million jobs.
Government employees should not be considered part of the employed as they are basically on public assistance. Obviously we need government and it's employees and they are very much appreciated. Further more any program that is created using government funds will require government funds for the entirety of it's life or somehow be shifted to the free market.
Further more any program that is created using government funds will require government funds for the entirety of it's life or somehow be shifted to the free market.
The point of the stimulus is not to permanently grow government (iikwthita). The point is to jumpstart the economy by creating more consumers, hopefully more than replacing the jobs the free market has been shedding.
Klugman who won the Nobel Prize for economics said that the path they are following is the right path. He believes we are already in a DEPRESSION and job growth is the only way out and tax cuts won't help at all! He actually believes that The President should be more aggresive in job growth and that dragging our feet is a BIG MISTAKE, because it may already be TOO LATE! Thanks George for the mess you left us with!
He writes a for the NY times-check it out. A Noble Prize for Economics- I THINK WE SHOULD LISTEN TO HIM!
My one surviving grandmother is almost 90 yrs. old. The depression she grew up in seems like what a real depression is. This is not a depression. Who's scare mongering? Yes, it's bad, I'll agree. I've lost a lot of money from my 401k. But, so far, we still have our house and cars. I'm not putting cardboard on the bottom of my shoes and unlike my grandma's dad, who was a country doctor during the great depression, my husband isn't being paid with chickens, canned veggies and fruit and milk cows. My grandpa had to quit school at an extremely early age and go into one of those work programs to support his mom and sister. How many kids are doing that right now? Obama isn't really the problem with the bill. Pelosi and Reid and cohorts put in their wish list. There are some things in it that make sense and would grow the economy, but there is also a lot in there that won't. They need to weed out what is immediately important to the issue at hand and look at the rest at a later date.
The posts about the Great Depression - does anyone know where we got the money for the basic materials to start up the war effort, if we were in a recession in 1938? Couldnt have been taxes. I dont know where to look this up efficiently - help?
Not related but interesting at wikipedia about the home front during the war. I bolded the part that I think is probably most relevant to my search:
Federal tax policy was highly contentious during the war, with Roosevelt battling a conservative Congress. Everyone agreed on the need for high taxes to pay for the war. Roosevelt tried to impose a 100% tax on incomes over $25,000 (which failed to pass), while Congress enlarged the base downward. By 1944 nearly every employed person was paying federal income taxes (compared to 10% in 1940).
Many controls were put on the economy.The most important were price controls, imposed on most products and monitored by the OPA. Wages were also controlled. In addition, the military imposed priorities that largely shaped industrial production.[1][2]
I dont understand that "100% tax " - uncaught wiki-error?
You don't? Simple. At various times Roosevelt proposed a 100% income tax so once you made over a certain amount that sum was to be confiscated. An economy killer if there ever was one.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It depends on what idiot you listen too
