Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-16-2009, 02:35 PM
 
Location: Dorchester
2,605 posts, read 4,844,527 times
Reputation: 1090

Advertisements

My problem with FDR's New Deal was that after the war ended and it was clear prosperity had returned in full force. Very few of the ad-hoc government positions or programs created during the depression were eliminated.

We can thank the the Great Depression and FDR for the bloated state and federal governments and programs we currently suffer under.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-16-2009, 03:09 PM
 
19,198 posts, read 31,479,243 times
Reputation: 4013
Quote:
Originally Posted by 58robbo View Post
surprise, surprise, i'm with momoney on this one! we're going to get jack squat out of social security. sure we might have the paper but we won't be able to buy anything with it.
Hmmm. When was the last time any of that paper defaulted? What is it that investors run to when they want to "flee to safety"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2009, 08:05 AM
 
3,283 posts, read 5,208,312 times
Reputation: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista View Post
Hmmm. When was the last time any of that paper defaulted? What is it that investors run to when they want to "flee to safety"?
totally off topic saganista/sandinista, have you read "confessions of an economic hitman"? here is a interview with its author:


YouTube - Confessions of an Economic Hit Man - Part I

i'd love to get your opinion on it. when i do, i'll answer your question
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2009, 02:29 AM
 
3,283 posts, read 5,208,312 times
Reputation: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista View Post
Hmmm. When was the last time any of that paper defaulted? What is it that investors run to when they want to "flee to safety"?

this however is not off topic:

China backs talks on dollar as reserve -Russian source | Currencies | Reuters

if the oil producers decide to jump on the bandwagon then what?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2009, 03:46 AM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,419 posts, read 20,311,358 times
Reputation: 8958
Default Myths about the "New Deal"

Quote:
Originally Posted by y2flyy View Post
It is time to put an end to these crazy and baseless myths that are being repeated constantly. It is time for the facts.
Over the past month people have seemed to suck up Rush Limbaugh/Sean Hannity's talking points and actually believe them as if they are TRUTH
Part 1 of Debunking Conservative MYTHS

1) FDR's "New Deal" A. Did not work or B. Deepened the Great Depression
Actually, Rush only reported this. He didn't make it up. There have been more than a few studies done that have concluded that the depression was prolonged by FDR's policies. Rush was probabably reporting on the most recent article about the Great Depression that appeared in the WSJ.
"Why wasn't the Depression followed by a vigorous recovery, like every other cycle? It should have been. The economic fundamentals that drive all expansions were very favorable during the New Deal. Productivity grew very rapidly after 1933, the price level was stable, real interest rates were low, and liquidity was plentiful. We have calculated on the basis of just productivity growth that employment and investment should have been back to normal levels by 1936. Similarly, Nobel Laureate Robert Lucas and Leonard Rapping calculated on the basis of just expansionary Federal Reserve policy that the economy should have been back to normal by 1935.

So what stopped a blockbuster recovery from ever starting? The New Deal. Some New Deal policies certainly benefited the economy by establishing a basic social safety net through Social Security and unemployment benefits, and by stabilizing the financial system through deposit insurance and the Securities Exchange Commission. But others violated the most basic economic principles by suppressing competition, and setting prices and wages in many sectors well above their normal levels. All told, these antimarket policies choked off powerful recovery forces that would have plausibly returned the economy back to trend by the mid-1930s"

How Government Prolonged the Depression - WSJ.com


What brought us out of the depression was World War II, and that fact used to be taught in high school history books when I was growing up...that's where I learned it. Those who want to rewrite history to serve their own political puroposes like to say it was the "New Deal". It wasn't.

Nice try though. If you think you can compete with real experts on this list of myths you claim you can "put an end to", be my guest, and good luck. Do the research. Learn.

Last edited by nononsenseguy; 03-20-2009 at 03:53 AM.. Reason: Additional comment
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2009, 04:25 AM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,419 posts, read 20,311,358 times
Reputation: 8958
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamexican View Post
So why don';t you explain to us how 8 million jobs created in the first term was a failure. I can't wait to here this. Give us some examples of when an administration has created more than 8 million jobs in four years. Give us a reason constantly rate FDR as one of the greatest presidents ever. In the future you could provide a link that telles the entire story.

I also recommend you read this.

THE GREAT DEPRESSION!
Where are you getting 8 million jobs created in the first term?

"The goal of the New Deal was to get Americans back to work. But the New Deal didn't restore employment. In fact, there was even less work on average during the New Deal than before FDR took office. Total hours worked per adult, including government employees, were 18% below their 1929 level between 1930-32, but were 23% lower on average during the New Deal (1933-39). Private hours worked were even lower after FDR took office, averaging 27% below their 1929 level, compared to 18% lower between in 1930-32.

Even comparing hours worked at the end of 1930s to those at the beginning of FDR's presidency doesn't paint a picture of recovery. Total hours worked per adult in 1939 remained about 21% below their 1929 level, compared to a decline of 27% in 1933. And it wasn't just work that remained scarce during the New Deal. Per capita consumption did not recover at all, remaining 25% below its trend level throughout the New Deal, and per-capita nonresidential investment averaged about 60% below trend. The Great Depression clearly continued long after FDR took office."

How Government Prolonged the Depression - WSJ.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2009, 06:19 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,643 posts, read 26,384,037 times
Reputation: 12648
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamexican View Post
So why don';t you explain to us how 8 million jobs created in the first term was a failure. I can't wait to here this. Give us some examples of when an administration has created more than 8 million jobs in four years. Give us a reason constantly rate FDR as one of the greatest presidents ever. In the future you could provide a link that telles the entire story.

I also recommend you read this.

THE GREAT DEPRESSION!


The Depression in the United States

This Day in History 1940: Franklin Roosevelt approves military draft

See the connection?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2009, 07:05 PM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,201,197 times
Reputation: 5240
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2flyy View Post
It is time to put an end to these crazy and baseless myths that are being repeated constantly. It is time for the facts.
Over the past month people have seemed to suck up Rush Limbaugh/Sean Hannity's talking points and actually believe them as if they are TRUTH
Part 1 of Debunking Conservative MYTHS

1) FDR's "New Deal" A. Did not work or B. Deepened the Great Depression
Excuse me? Are you serious? Why don't Republicans just say ELVIS is still alive if it is so easy to just change history....
The FACT is FDR's "NEW DEAL" (while not perfect) was necessary and a very historic and successful program. How was the NEW DEAL not successful (there are 5-6 New Deal programs that are still in existant TODAY, Ever heard of SOCIAL SECURITY that has kept 35% of Americans out of poverty? What about the FDIC that stopped the bleeding of banks runs and insures your deposit in banks? What about the SEC, the program that started the regulation of the Stock Market from the greeds who got us into the Great depression *Stock Market Crash of 1929*....)
If the New deal was such a failure....why are there so many programs from the New Deal we STILL use today?
In FDR's first term U.S.'s GNP/GDP grew 34% and 58% by 1940
Unemployment (which was at an astronomical rate when FDR took office 25%) he cut that in half in his first term with his infrastructure programs (The CCC and the Works Progress Administration (almost every city is America today, has a park, bridge, school, or road built from WPA) all before WWII. FDR created nearly 10 million jobs (before WWII)

FDR set this country forward and it is exactly what Obama is looking to do!

Even despite these facts I can easily debunk conservatives false myths by asking a few questions....
If it is true that the New Deal (Spending Stimulus) did not work as you guys claim, WHY THE HELL WAS FDR SO DAMN POPULAR in the 1930s??!!
If the New DEAL was not working (and if the Depression was getting worse) wouldn't they have kicked FDR out of office? Instead of him being ELECTED TO 4 TERMS!
Why do you think FDR won his second term by the biggest landslide in history in 1936? Because the NEW DEAL WAS WORKING!
FDR has since been hailed as one of the greatest presidents in history, and I can assure you that is NOT b/c the NEW DEAL FAILED....

FDR's opponents (Republicans) before his administration and during the New Deal were saying FDR would spend TOO MUCH; calling him a socialist/marxist who would take this country towards the Soviet Union....
Sounds alot like what they are saying about Obama today huh?

But what was the historical outcome, Herbert Hoover, an uncharismatic out of touch business man was ousted out of office and largely blamed by the America people for the Great Depression (Blaiming Hoover's "do nothing" approach,deregulation, and the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act)....Sounds a lot like George W. Bush doesn't it?
While the new guy in town Franklin D. Roosevelt (hailed as the candidate of "change" during the 1932 campaign but criticized by Republicans as a left wing socialist radical that would bring down America)
Hmmm sounds alot like someone in office today, doesn't it?

Well what was the OUTCOME?
FDR is looked at as the leader who led America out of the biggest Economic Crisis of all-time....

My point is Conservatives lie all you want but history is not on your side....

To be continued....

social security?????????

you do remember that madoff was charged with a ponzie scheme, that he was doing the exact same thing that the socialist pig fdr did, and that the current goverment does as well.
MarketWatch.com Story

it is not in the pervue of the US goverment to provide for your retirement, not is health care.

if madoff can be charged with a crime for what he did, then so should all in the federal goverment who steal money from the people in their own federal ponzie scheme.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2009, 07:28 PM
 
Location: Maryland about 20 miles NW of DC
6,104 posts, read 5,991,811 times
Reputation: 2479
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParkTwain View Post
Tell us what the figures are for how many Americans EVER had a retirement INCOME before 1933?

Before the age of Roosevelt and Social Security and the Fair Labor Act which empowered unions to ask for benefits like a pension most Americans didn't live long enough to need retirement income. The average life expectancy in 1930 was less than 55 years and in the good old days around 1900 it was 46 years. Your retirement plan was something called death.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2009, 07:57 PM
 
Location: Maryland about 20 miles NW of DC
6,104 posts, read 5,991,811 times
Reputation: 2479
Quote:
Originally Posted by irspow View Post
I know that I am waaaay off base here, so please forgive me.

What has social security really done for people? I know that it has confiscated amazing amounts of wealth since its inception. I know also that it has removed the natural responsibility of children to care for their parents. I know that it has "inadvertently" discouraged the responsible saving of money for their retirements. I know that it has created a "right" to retire for anyone regardless of their value to society.

As to the "success" of social security. Yes it has allowed countless greedy children to abandon their parents without remorse because Godvernment will take care of them. And yes, any programs, no matter how destructive, will continue forever as long as people see it as a "right". This is precisely how socialism serves as the non-violent bridge between capitalism and communism.

Tax people into a state of need, "provide" them relief, tax them into further need, provide them even more. Program after program is developed until we need everything to be "provided". This is how the freedom-loving "capitalists" will beg to be enslaved by communism. Genius.

All the while, your oppressors feign benevolence, while they experiment on their subjects. How sad.


What has Social Security and Medicare done? It was allowed tens of million Americans to live in retirement and not live in poverty. Before these things existed most Americans didn't even live long enough to see retirement. They died and average American life expectancy was less than 55 years in 1930. You died because effective medical care was really only for the people rich enough to afford it. These people lived in a few cities like New York or Chicago. You didn't need fancy diseases like cancer or heart disease to kill you a common case of the flu or pneumonia was sufficient because most Americans didn't live near what we consider a hospital and only had a country doctor and access to the drugs only a general store could carry. Do you really want to go back to this world? If you do you need to get it out of your head the silly idea that you will live to 65 let alone 70 years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:33 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top