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.
To All..........
I shared these pictures because they reflect what America can be and has been in the past. Strength of basic character.
I remember these people from my own family back in the late 1940's and 50's. Rock solid all of them.
If we try we can be like that again............
I'm not going to get into an argument over "which decade was better". However, those photos are a reflection of an ideal that was often not a reality. Yes, they are moving and show strength, character and resolve etched on the faces, but they do not show the hard scrabble reality and divisiveness that existed then.
Read the stories and look at the photos of police being unleashed on protesters to "keep order". Read the stories and look at the photos of towns shuttering their doors to migrant workers under threat, not even letting children who had been on the road for weeks into town. Read the stories and look at the photos of migrants in the west finding entire families dead on the side of the road from being attacked or simply starving to death. Read the stories and look at the photos of children in New York City dressed in burlap and suffering from rickets who hadn't eaten in days. Read the stories and look at the photos of people being thrown out of their homes, all of their belongings tossed into the street because they couldn't afford the rent. Read and look at the photos of people who literally froze to death in their homes during the winter because they could not afford fuel to heat their homes. Read and look at the photos of churches shutting their doors and refusing to hand out food to people who were starving. Read the stories and look at the photos of the US Army being unleashed on its own citizens and veterans in the nations capital.
Then realize that those stories represent only a small portion of the population. Those who maintained employment during the Depression, which was at a minimum 75% of the population, were relatively comfortable. Food was abundant and cheap. Consumer goods were still being produced and were affordable. Housing was readily available and easily afforded. People who were politically connected made fortunes off of others tragedy.
People want to focus on the Depression as a period where "strength and character" persevered against horrible odds. The truth is, the Depression was nothing more then business as usual and despite people wanting to look at the past through the rosiest glasses around, people were the same then as they are now. For every family starving and shivering in the cold, there were three others sitting around their radio enjoying a meal in a warm home talking about that "poor Jones family down the street". That is before the conversation turned to the latest baseball rumors and the fact that Johnny needed new shoes because his old ones were a little scuffed up.
I'm not going to get into an argument over "which decade was better". However, those photos are a reflection of an ideal that was often not a reality. Yes, they are moving and show strength, character and resolve etched on the faces, but they do not show the hard scrabble reality and divisiveness that existed then.
Read the stories and look at the photos of police being unleashed on protesters to "keep order". Read the stories and look at the photos of towns shuttering their doors to migrant workers under threat, not even letting children who had been on the road for weeks into town. Read the stories and look at the photos of migrants in the west finding entire families dead on the side of the road from being attacked or simply starving to death. Read the stories and look at the photos of children in New York City dressed in burlap and suffering from rickets who hadn't eaten in days. Read the stories and look at the photos of people being thrown out of their homes, all of their belongings tossed into the street because they couldn't afford the rent. Read and look at the photos of people who literally froze to death in their homes during the winter because they could not afford fuel to heat their homes. Read and look at the photos of churches shutting their doors and refusing to hand out food to people who were starving. Read the stories and look at the photos of the US Army being unleashed on its own citizens and veterans in the nations capital.
Then realize that those stories represent only a small portion of the population. Those who maintained employment during the Depression, which was at a minimum 75% of the population, were relatively comfortable. Food was abundant and cheap. Consumer goods were still being produced and were affordable. Housing was readily available and easily afforded. People who were politically connected made fortunes off of others tragedy.
People want to focus on the Depression as a period where "strength and character" persevered against horrible odds. The truth is, the Depression was nothing more then business as usual and despite people wanting to look at the past through the rosiest glasses around, people were the same then as they are now. For every family starving and shivering in the cold, there were three others sitting around their radio enjoying a meal in a warm home talking about that "poor Jones family down the street". That is before the conversation turned to the latest baseball rumors and the fact that Johnny needed new shoes because his old ones were a little scuffed up.
Agreed, there were many instances of violence and relative comfort. And some just gave up. But when I look at these people that is not what I see. I see determination to make it til tomorrow. I think of my grandmother, who had stuff and security until my grandfarher ran off with another woman and never paid a cent of support. Did she whine to anyone? No. She got a job giving out samples at the grocery store. She sold stuff. She raised my aunt through her teens and my mom through most of them herself. But she was not ungenerous. She had a pot of food always ready and the 'okies' who came through LA could stop and have a hot meal. They fed people nearly every night.
Her mother left a husband who couldn't stay in one place and opened a hotel when women usually didn't do those things. He came and went. She didn't let that mess up her life or their childrens.
What I see in these people's eyes is a vow to keep trying. They farmed as long as they could. They moved on if they had to. But they chose to act.
What seems to be the mantra today is poor little me. For a time I was homeless. There is a fascinating division there. People commonly start out scared and unsure of what to do. But those who know their goal isn't sleeping at the shelter usually have found something else within the year. Maybe not as much but something. Because they tried. Others who can't go there settle for the endless circle of shelters and motels. But this is because they choose, becasue its easy and using what you can find out there isn't.
Maybe my grandmothers were a guiding set of spirits, but from the start I KNEW I'd never 'settle' for that. Once you convince yourself that you cannot help yourself, then you can't. Once you stop seeing the small good things because they are small, you just lost. The people who moved on when there was no choice still actively made a choice to try and do the best they could. That is the first step you have to do even if there is a sea of help or barely nothing.
If any of you ever get the opportunity to visit D.C., the Library of Congress is a definite "must see." However, plan what you want to see there because the information the LOC houses is gigantic.
Thanks for the excellent summary, setting the record straight on the realities of the Great Depression. The story of the "poormaster" was one likely repeated in many towns and cities across America. As interesting as the photos from the era of 1939-1943 were, they do not reflect the desperation of millions of people who suffered through the earlier years of the 1930s. Nostalgia is often a yearning for a time that never was. People are still people in any era, responding as best they can to the challenges of the times.
Agreed, there were many instances of violence and relative comfort. And some just gave up. But when I look at these people that is not what I see. I see determination to make it til tomorrow. I think of my grandmother, who had stuff and security until my grandfarher ran off with another woman and never paid a cent of support. Did she whine to anyone? No. She got a job giving out samples at the grocery store. She sold stuff. She raised my aunt through her teens and my mom through most of them herself. But she was not ungenerous. She had a pot of food always ready and the 'okies' who came through LA could stop and have a hot meal. They fed people nearly every night.
Her mother left a husband who couldn't stay in one place and opened a hotel when women usually didn't do those things. He came and went. She didn't let that mess up her life or their childrens.
What I see in these people's eyes is a vow to keep trying. They farmed as long as they could. They moved on if they had to. But they chose to act.
What seems to be the mantra today is poor little me. For a time I was homeless. There is a fascinating division there. People commonly start out scared and unsure of what to do. But those who know their goal isn't sleeping at the shelter usually have found something else within the year. Maybe not as much but something. Because they tried. Others who can't go there settle for the endless circle of shelters and motels. But this is because they choose, becasue its easy and using what you can find out there isn't.
Maybe my grandmothers were a guiding set of spirits, but from the start I KNEW I'd never 'settle' for that. Once you convince yourself that you cannot help yourself, then you can't. Once you stop seeing the small good things because they are small, you just lost. The people who moved on when there was no choice still actively made a choice to try and do the best they could. That is the first step you have to do even if there is a sea of help or barely nothing.
What you are saying is the same mantra repeated by the "poormaster" in the story and a belief shared by many people. The thought was, if you were unemployed and had no money, it was because you didn't want to work, were lazy, stupid, etc. The same stigmas applied to the poor today were the ones applied to the poor then. Of course, then the poverty was far more severe and widespread then it is today.
Under FDR's New Deal, aid was distributed and expanded in the first few years of the 1930's. The Federal government took over the distribution and removed the power from the local "poormasters" to decide who should be helped. Then, by 1935 the Federal aid disappeared and the work programs like the WPA replaced them. The "poormasters" who represented the state and local governments were once again in charge. The problem was that not enough jobs were created by the government or private sector to even begin to dent the issue of unemployment, even among skilled laborers. The unemployment rate was nearly double what it is today in 1936 and that elevated level had been maintained for years.
People persevered, they did the best they could. Some were fortunate, others weren't and many simply got lucky. For every story like the one you relayed, there is one about the man who went out to work everyday only to have every door shut in his face. Exhausted after having searched for work all day, he would go home to his wife and starving children in their one room tenement empty handed. Somedays he got lucky and was paid for a day's labor and those nights, he could bring some food home. He wasn't lazy, he wanted to work, but there was no steady employment available. These are the people that needed the help and were denied it.
At the protests there were people of all walks of life and political affiliations because the Depression impacted everyone. These weren't lazy people looking for handouts and a free ride, these were people trying to do all they could to make sure their children didn't go to bed hungry yet another night and that they had heat in the winter so they didn't freeze to death. The dichotomy is that at the worst only one in four Americans were in that boat during the Depression. For the other three, times were not easy, but they were not at risk.
I'm a fairly conservative person and think there are many reforms that can be made to the modern welfare system and agree wholeheartedly that the "dole" should not be a way of life. However, in the Depression, people were starving and dieing in the darkest days and it was not do to lack of effort or lack of food or ability to feed people. The starving would shuffle by markets brimming with food, they just couldn't afford it. It was not as if the rations that were issued were more than subsistence anyway. Bread coupons were only good for "day old" from the bakeries. The bread had to be soaked in water just so that it could be eaten.
No doubt about it, The Depression was tough stuff.
It didn't help that at that exact point in history the Dust Bowl arrived and killed many people just by choking them to death. Great documentary out about The Dust Bowl.
But I think what started as a routine recession was exacerbated by poor government policy by the Federal Reserve. Ben Bernanke is on record as believing the Fed caused the Great Depression.
And it didn't help that the income tax rate went from 25% to 68% and finally up to 94%.
Thanks for the excellent summary, setting the record straight on the realities of the Great Depression. The story of the "poormaster" was one likely repeated in many towns and cities across America. As interesting as the photos from the era of 1939-1943 were, they do not reflect the desperation of millions of people who suffered through the earlier years of the 1930s. Nostalgia is often a yearning for a time that never was. People are still people in any era, responding as best they can to the challenges of the times.
Thank you. I also enjoyed the photos, but 1939-1943 was a VERY different time period and experience then what was going on from 1930-1937 or so. By 1939 the economy had begun recovering and jobs were coming back and more readily available. The onset of the war in Europe, long before US entry, kickstarted a sustained recovery in the US as the Lend Lease supplies to Britain began. Once the US entered the war, everything changed again. The large number of men needed for the military virtually eliminated unemployment in short order. The factories were running 24/7, farms were producing all they could and people had a common rallying point to organize around. The economy became far more centralized and planned, including price fixing and rationing to meet the demands of the military and our Allies.
Overall though, the biggest change was psychological. There was ultimately no point to the suffering in 1932. The only goal was survival, every family for themselves. Get through until tomorrow and then do it again. In 1942 any remaining suffering had a point. The nation had been attacked, we were at war. The goal was to win the war and everyone needed to chip in to do it. It was no longer haves vs. have nots it was Americans vs. our enemies. The people down the street were making the same sacrifices you were.
That is the central difference that I think a lot of people miss. The Depression was widespread individual suffering that made people feel like they were on an island unto themselves. The social fabric was stretched to breaking as people resented the person down the street who kept their job and whose kids weren't starving. The war years ushered in a collective mentality that re-united the country for a common purpose. We are all in this together and we all need to sacrifice to ensure victory.
What you are saying is the same mantra repeated by the "poormaster" in the story and a belief shared by many people. The thought was, if you were unemployed and had no money, it was because you didn't want to work, were lazy, stupid, etc. The same stigmas applied to the poor today were the ones applied to the poor then. Of course, then the poverty was far more severe and widespread then it is today.
Under FDR's New Deal, aid was distributed and expanded in the first few years of the 1930's. The Federal government took over the distribution and removed the power from the local "poormasters" to decide who should be helped. Then, by 1935 the Federal aid disappeared and the work programs like the WPA replaced them. The "poormasters" who represented the state and local governments were once again in charge. The problem was that not enough jobs were created by the government or private sector to even begin to dent the issue of unemployment, even among skilled laborers. The unemployment rate was nearly double what it is today in 1936 and that elevated level had been maintained for years.
People persevered, they did the best they could. Some were fortunate, others weren't and many simply got lucky. For every story like the one you relayed, there is one about the man who went out to work everyday only to have every door shut in his face. Exhausted after having searched for work all day, he would go home to his wife and starving children in their one room tenement empty handed. Somedays he got lucky and was paid for a day's labor and those nights, he could bring some food home. He wasn't lazy, he wanted to work, but there was no steady employment available. These are the people that needed the help and were denied it.
At the protests there were people of all walks of life and political affiliations because the Depression impacted everyone. These weren't lazy people looking for handouts and a free ride, these were people trying to do all they could to make sure their children didn't go to bed hungry yet another night and that they had heat in the winter so they didn't freeze to death. The dichotomy is that at the worst only one in four Americans were in that boat during the Depression. For the other three, times were not easy, but they were not at risk.
I'm a fairly conservative person and think there are many reforms that can be made to the modern welfare system and agree wholeheartedly that the "dole" should not be a way of life. However, in the Depression, people were starving and dieing in the darkest days and it was not do to lack of effort or lack of food or ability to feed people. The starving would shuffle by markets brimming with food, they just couldn't afford it. It was not as if the rations that were issued were more than subsistence anyway. Bread coupons were only good for "day old" from the bakeries. The bread had to be soaked in water just so that it could be eaten.
I don't disagree with you. There was a spectrum and people come in all sorts of degrees. The people who stood in line did so because they were hungry. It was worse for them then than today because it was seen more as a personal failure than today. And I support aid to people who need it for food and heat and housing.
What I really hate is those who abuse things. For instance, selling the food stamps for cash, then not having enough for food. They are not only abusing the system and the family who the neighbors feed, but ALL the people who really need it and use it properly. I don't have a lot of money, and I could go to food banks or get some food stamps, but I don't NEED to. I leave that for people who do. I don't like the idea of getting it just because you CAN.
I think the great difference between now and then is that we're at the end of a time when for so many who are now at least challenged, it was *assumed* that tomorrow would always be fine. People lost perspective. Credit made it possible to spend far beyond means. If you've been raised with this idea then problems come up it throws up a double whammy. Back in the thirties, it wasn't that far from a time when people knew that plenty could dissapear. We've been on a long secure time and especially the children of those who protected their kids from the lessons of the 30's and 40 may not have those tools. I have come to see the problems I've hit along the way as benefits because once you realize that tomorrow is never ever guarenteed to be as you expect you see things differently and learn to appreciate what you have. If there is no appreciation of that then its supplied by adding 'stuff' just to add it.
Those people out there who made bad decisions on morgages and others based on the belief in an ever abundant tomorrow will mostly come through fine. But they won't look at things the same, just as their grandparents didn't. But their grandparents had the advantage of the awareness that things happen and the expectation you don't fold. So will their children.
People want to focus on the Depression as a period where "strength and character" persevered against horrible odds. The truth is, the Depression was nothing more then business as usual and despite people wanting to look at the past through the rosiest glasses around, people were the same then as they are now. For every family starving and shivering in the cold, there were three others sitting around their radio enjoying a meal in a warm home talking about that "poor Jones family down the street". That is before the conversation turned to the latest baseball rumors and the fact that Johnny needed new shoes because his old ones were a little scuffed up.
I think that you do a great disservice to those who were unemployed during the depression since there was no social safety net to help them. Their plight was the motivator for the social safety net we have today.
-or-
should we have left those have nots to rot while the rest of us played and got fat??
I don't disagree with you. There was a spectrum and people come in all sorts of degrees. The people who stood in line did so because they were hungry. It was worse for them then than today because it was seen more as a personal failure than today. And I support aid to people who need it for food and heat and housing.
What I really hate is those who abuse things. For instance, selling the food stamps for cash, then not having enough for food. They are not only abusing the system and the family who the neighbors feed, but ALL the people who really need it and use it properly. I don't have a lot of money, and I could go to food banks or get some food stamps, but I don't NEED to. I leave that for people who do. I don't like the idea of getting it just because you CAN.
I think the great difference between now and then is that we're at the end of a time when for so many who are now at least challenged, it was *assumed* that tomorrow would always be fine. People lost perspective. Credit made it possible to spend far beyond means. If you've been raised with this idea then problems come up it throws up a double whammy. Back in the thirties, it wasn't that far from a time when people knew that plenty could dissapear. We've been on a long secure time and especially the children of those who protected their kids from the lessons of the 30's and 40 may not have those tools. I have come to see the problems I've hit along the way as benefits because once you realize that tomorrow is never ever guarenteed to be as you expect you see things differently and learn to appreciate what you have. If there is no appreciation of that then its supplied by adding 'stuff' just to add it.
Those people out there who made bad decisions on morgages and others based on the belief in an ever abundant tomorrow will mostly come through fine. But they won't look at things the same, just as their grandparents didn't. But their grandparents had the advantage of the awareness that things happen and the expectation you don't fold. So will their children.
My point was to address the idea that people who needed assistance in the Depression were some form of "free loader". The fact was that the vast majority were not. The same ethos that you are attaching to modern users of social safety nets are the same attributes people attached to the unemployed during the Depression. My macro point was to illustrate the dichotomy that existed. People who maintained employment tended to have a harsh view of those that didn't. We can see in our latest financial crisis the same splits between the general "haves" and the "have nots". It seemed to me that people were attempting to paint the Depression as some sort of "rise above" occasion where the nation united and helped each other rise above. The truth is that the nation was very fractured and people who were employed resented the unemployed and vice versa.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandpa Pipes
I think that you do a great disservice to those who were unemployed during the depression since there was no social safety net to help them. Their plight was the motivator for the social safety net we have today.
-or-
should we have left those have nots to rot while the rest of us played and got fat??
That was not my point at all. I was attempting to address the idea that it was some sort of unified nation relying on strength of character to get by, neighbors helping neighbors, etc. That was simply not the case. The nation was deeply fractured between the haves and have nots and many of the same epithets hurled at people today who are down on their luck and struggling were applied to people during the Depression.
I posted the story of the "poormaster" in Hoboken because his attitude was very much reflective of the mindset of the majority of people. Those who were unemployed and struggling were in that position because they were lazy, not do to any circumstance beyond their control. That attitude is what led to the safety net that had been established in the early 1930's by the Federal government to be taken away and led to increased suffering among people in the mid-1930's.
My overall point is that people are arguing that "then" was different then "now", but it really wasn't. The idea of expanding bread coupons to keep people from starving could be seen as analogous to the extension of unemployment benefits in the recent downturn. The majority of Depression era Americans were very much against extending public assistance to the needy after the first couple of years for the same reason many people were against the continual extension of unemployment a couple of years ago. The people who are poor are obviously not trying hard enough or they wouldn't be poor, right? Why should the "Jones family" be getting bread coupons, heating and rent assistance, when I'm out busting my back to provide?
Ultimately, people were no different then they are now.
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.
