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 03-03-2009, 02:59 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,341,064 times
Reputation: 4798

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefly View Post
Hmmm... using vastly different ideology, both Reagan and FDR dropped unemployment by large amounts in response to very different economic crises and were both very popular.

Maybe, just maybe, one ideology isn't always right.
Unemployment rates

1923-29 3.3
1930 8.9
1931 15.9
1932 23.6
1933 24.9
1934 21.7
1935 20.1
1936 17.0
1937 14.3
1938 19.0
1939 17.2
1940 14.6
1941 9.9
1942 4.7

Compensation from before World War I through the Great Depression
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-03-2009, 03:03 PM
 
3,283 posts, read 5,190,903 times
Reputation: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevK View Post
Let's see if we can get the Republicans to go along with that!

the republican party today can't go along with anything. they have zero credibility left. they had all the opportunites to get their house in order when they had the house, senate and presidency. what did they do? they spent and regulated and generally destroyed our economy. now we criticize the democrats! they are going to do the same thing as bush! spend, regulate, attack economic liberty, attack civil liberty and nation build.

just when i thought the gop and conservatives couldn't get any lower, they poll mitt romney as their favorite to lead the gop at the next election. we have learned absolutely nothing!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2009, 03:16 PM
 
Location: New York, New York
4,906 posts, read 6,825,460 times
Reputation: 1033
This is so true.
The New Deal and right-wing revisionism - The Boston Globe



Quote:
ONE OF THE most diverting aspects of the debate over President Obama's stimulus plan has been the concerted conservative attack on the New Deal.
One might have thought that voters of that day had pretty much settled the question of whether the New Deal worked by enthusiastically reelecting FDR, and not once but three times. But since right-wing revisionism is really an arrow aimed at the current stimulus plan, the effort to discredit the New Deal is worth examining.

[i]Scot Lehigh can be reached at lehigh@globe.com.
[mod edit:copyright]

Last edited by TnHilltopper; 03-04-2009 at 12:07 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2009, 03:29 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,341,064 times
Reputation: 4798
Who is providing fake data? The BLS.gov website or Mr. Scot Lehigh

If we used his ideology people on unemployment would be counted in the employed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2009, 03:43 PM
 
Location: New York, New York
4,906 posts, read 6,825,460 times
Reputation: 1033
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
Who is providing fake data? The BLS.gov website or Mr. Scot Lehigh

If we used his ideology people on unemployment would be counted in the employed.
Not so Big John, this is what he is refering to.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Works_P...Administration
Quote:
agency, employing millions of people and affecting almost every locality in the United States, especially rural and western mountain populations. It was created by Franklin Delano Roosevelt's presidential order, and funded by Congress with passage of the Emergency Relief Appropriation Act of 1935 on April 8, 1935. (The legislation had passed in the House by a margin of 329 to 78, but got bogged down in the Senate.) [1]
It continued and extended relief programs similar to the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) started by Herbert Hoover and the U.S. Congress in 1932. Headed by Harry Hopkins, the WPA provided jobs and income to the unemployed during the Great Depression in the United States. Between 1935 and 1939 the WPA provided 8.5 million jobs.[2] The program built many public buildings, projects and roads and operated large arts, drama, media and literacy projects. It fed children and redistributed food, clothing and housing. Almost every community in America has a park, bridge or school constructed by the agency. Expenditures from 1936 to 1939 totaled nearly $7 billion.[1]
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f4/Usa-wpa-graphic.jpg/180px-Usa-wpa-graphic.jpg (broken link)
WPA Graphic


Until closed down by Congress and the war boom in 1943, the various programs of the WPA added up to the largest employment base in the country — indeed, the largest cluster of government employment opportunities in most states. Anyone who needed a job could become eligible for most of its jobs.[1] Hourly wages were the prevailing wages in the area; the rules said workers could not work more than 30 hours a week but many projects included months in the field, with workers eating and sleeping on worksites. Before 1940, there was some training involved in teaching new skills and the project's original legislation went forward with a strong emphasis on family, training and building people up. The role and participation of labor unions in WPA processes is unclear.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2009, 03:51 PM
 
11,155 posts, read 15,656,642 times
Reputation: 4209
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
Unemployment rates

1923-29 3.3
1930 8.9
1931 15.9
1932 23.6
1933 24.9
1934 21.7
1935 20.1
1936 17.0
1937 14.3
1938 19.0
1939 17.2
1940 14.6
1941 9.9
1942 4.7

Compensation from before World War I through the Great Depression
You tend to have a conservative bend to your posts, BigJon, so I'm confused if you're trying to show FDR failed or what.

By your own stats, he dropped unemployment by 10 points before we even engaged in the war - down 20 points once the war machine started kicking.

I've always wondered if he actually did know Pearl Harbor was coming and let it slide, knowing what it would do for the economy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2009, 05:56 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,341,064 times
Reputation: 4798
What year do you think we started vamping up and providing funding to the war effort? There was a fairly big campaign while FDR still was espousing isolationism (expect more liberals to come out the wood work because that's not what they learned in school)

Did you know there was a wall street coup to overthrow FDR? I'm sure that dirty capitalist bit of history took up chapter after chapter. How about FDR calling the previous administration socialist. Did you know the funding for most of the new deal projects went to pay off the voter base that was iffy of him. Generally those same people that thought he was going to steal their wealth (he did, stole all the gold then announced it suddenly was worth more because someone had a monopoly on it.... He never looked back since.

You might see his economic choices in today's liberal mantra. "Look at the south and how poor and worthless they are". Well you took the money from everyone and almost solely distributed it all for political gain (go figure, a crook that stole everyone's gold also had self interest in politics).

Quote:
“It [the 1930s] is the only decade in the history of the United States in which there was no economic growth. Income per person in 1939—adjusted for changes in the general level of prices, or real income per person—was less than in 1929.”

“They came to Washington to do good, and stayed to do well.”

Georgia Senator Richard Russell complained:

“the manner in which these funds have been distributed to date has a tendency to make the rich States richer, and to make the poor States and the poor people of those States poorer.”
http://www.hillsdale.edu/images/user...%20Reality.doc

From the Christina Romer paper, which I'm sure you guys know who that is by now:

Quote:
Fiscal policy played a relatively small role in stimulating recovery in the United States. Indeed, the Revenue Act of 1932 increased American tax rates greatly in an attempt to balance the federal budget, and by doing so dealt another contractionary blow to the economy by further
http://emlab.berkeley.edu/users/crom...depression.pdf

[mod edit:copyright]

Last edited by TnHilltopper; 03-04-2009 at 12:09 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2009, 06:09 PM
 
Location: New York, New York
4,906 posts, read 6,825,460 times
Reputation: 1033
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
What year do you think we started vamping up and providing funding to the war effort? There was a fairly big campaign while FDR still was espousing isolationism (expect more liberals to come out the wood work because that's not what they learned in school)

Did you know there was a wall street coup to overthrow FDR? I'm sure that dirty capitalist bit of history took up chapter after chapter. How about FDR calling the previous administration socialist. Did you know the funding for most of the new deal projects went to pay off the voter base that was iffy of him. Generally those same people that thought he was going to steal their wealth (he did, stole all the gold then announced it suddenly was worth more because someone had a monopoly on it.... He never looked back since.

You might see his economic choices in today's liberal mantra. "Look at the south and how poor and worthless they are". Well you took the money from everyone and almost solely distributed it all for political gain (go figure, a crook that stole everyone's gold also had self interest in politics).

http://www.hillsdale.edu/images/user...%20Reality.doc

From the Christina Romer paper which I'm sure you guys know who that is by now:

http://emlab.berkeley.edu/users/crom...depression.pdf









Sorry John but you started the whole lets see what the people thought. Lets see what they thought after 8 years.


After 12 years he still won by a landslide 432 to 99.
President Elect - 1944
Reagan can't match those numbers. You may hate FDR, but like Reagan the people spoke. I think its petty to claim to know how thing were opposed to those that were there. You might hate him but history tells a different story.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2009, 06:33 PM
 
Location: Prepperland
18,842 posts, read 14,027,168 times
Reputation: 16504
Don't forget that "Isolationist" FDR was secretly funneling support to Claire L. Chennault's Flying Tigers, before the start of hostilities in 1941.
Chennault spent the winter of 1940–1941 in Washington, supervising the purchase of 100 Curtiss P-40 fighters (diverted from a Royal Air Force order) and the recruiting of 100 pilots and about 200 ground crewmen. During the summer and fall 1941, these 300 men, carrying civilian passports, boarded ships destined for Burma.

FDR was one of the greatest liars of American politics. And Americans who revere him are the greatest fools.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-03-2009, 06:42 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,341,064 times
Reputation: 4798
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamexican View Post
Sorry John but you started the whole lets see what the people thought. Lets see what they thought after 8 years.


After 12 years he still won by a landslide 432 to 99.
President Elect - 1944
Reagan can't match those numbers. You may hate FDR, but like Reagan the people spoke. I think its petty to claim to know how thing were opposed to those that were there. You might hate him but history tells a different story.
You are working on revisionism. If you'll notice the "blue" states were the ones brought up in the previous post for the ones that got the most money. Totally ignoring the impoverished (in the pocket) south. Just saying... And Mondale carried one state. His own. Reagan took the biggest land slide in American history. Still has that record. 525 electoral votes before that it was LBJ (Carter really really sucked). It's not that Reagan was a bad guy or people didn't like him. The reason the largest group and most vocal group around don't like him because he invoked god @ practically every corner. It sends chills down the spines of atheist who need feverishly to prove religious people have no possible way to make clear decision (straight from Lenin's brain and out liberals mouths).
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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 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