FDR Prolonged the Depression

Grind said:
i do believe this qualifies as a pwn, as much as i like dano.
Click to expand...

Well it would be except I am smarter than I was in 2004. Kerry in as prez would mean a Repub congress still in power which is more important than who is prez. And Kerry would only have 4 years of Bush which isn't a lot to use to blame Repubs for any problems from his spending proposals, especially given the economy then was better.

If Obama gets in he can and will spend away and blame the Repubs for his problems and it will fly. And given that McCain differs from Bush and actually wants to cut government's role in healthcare, I think McCain makes sense now. Bush is a Socialist posing as a Conservative. McCain is a moderate posing as a Conservative. They both blow but McCain would at least use the veto enough to control Dems spending, keep an ok economy and not have the blame laid on "Conservatism" or the "free market" or whatever other false label lefties will scapegoat for Liberal Republicanism.
 
Mottleydude said:
YOu need to go study some history as you don't know what your talking about.
Click to expand...

Another good retort, I've read history and then I've gone over the numbers from then. Look at the unemployment spikes after Smoot Hawley (and you get to blame Repubs for that). Look at how things continued under FDR.

FDR's own New Deal architect came clean and admitted continuing the policies of Hoover, I mean after reading his confession this shouldn't even be up for debate.
 
Dungheap said:
Maybe you should work on your reading comprehension before posing dumbass questions like those above.
Click to expand...
Or maybe you can realize that some people are asking different questions in the hopes of taking the conversation in a different direction. I know that it is against the "conventional wisdom" hence my first post in the thread.

Your answers on this thread fail, mostly because they aren't arguments just statements of somebody else's opinions and assertions of "conventional wisdom" without even an article to show that it is conventional wisdom (btw, it is). What I seek here is whether or not you assume that "conventional wisdom" is the end-all be-all of all argument and have shown you where that has not been the case in the past and why it should not therefore be assumed to be correct now.

If nobody questioned "conventional wisdom" where would we be today? Dang, back in the 1800s it was "conventional wisdom" that man would never travel faster than 25 MPH because it was "dangerous" to do so.

Conventional wisdom is the most overrated "wisdom" ever.
 
Mottleydude said:
What a moron! The Great Depresion was nearly 4 years old when FDR took office.

It took FDR about 3 years of hit or miss policies untill he adopted the economic policies of John Meynard Keynes and noted how the Swedish used deficit spending by the government to put money back in circulation. They were the first nation to recover from the Great Depresion by doing so.

I love these ideological second guessings of people who don't kwow what their talking about and haven't studied their history.
Click to expand...

LMAO! A keynesian fossil is discovered! Tell me then, why isn't it Bush's and the Demopublicans in congress deficit spending helping us "recover"?
 
Damocles said:
Or maybe you can realize that some people are asking different questions in the hopes of taking the conversation in a different direction. I know that it is against the "conventional wisdom" hence my first post in the thread.

Your answers on this thread fail, mostly because they aren't arguments just statements of somebody else's opinions and assertions of "conventional wisdom" without even an article to show that it is conventional wisdom (btw, it is). What I seek here is whether or not you assume that "conventional wisdom" is the end-all be-all of all argument and have shown you where that has not been the case in the past and why it should not therefore be assumed to be correct now.

If nobody questioned "conventional wisdom" where would we be today? Dang, back in the 1800s it was "conventional wisdom" that man would never travel faster than 25 MPH because it was "dangerous" to do so.

Conventional wisdom is the most overrated "wisdom" ever.
Click to expand...


You're just being an idiot for the sake of being an idiot. My responses in this thread have been limited to combating the assertion that there is "no question" that FDR prolonged the Great Depression. In fact, there is plenty of doubt that his policies did prolong the Depression, as most economists and historians do not subscribe to this theory.

Maybe conventional wisdom is wrong, but that doesn't mean that there is "no question" that FDR's policies prolonged the Great Depression.

That's why your questions were fucking stupid if directed at me. I'm not saying that conventional wisdom is correct or even plausible. All I'm saying is that the idea that there is "no question" that FDR prolonged the Great Depression, something Southern Man and Dano seem to take as a given, is seriously flawed and the result of an abundance of ignorance.
 
Dungheap said:
In fact, it is a great response, succinct and to the point. No excess verbiage or obfuscation.

This particular paper was notable because it differed from most assessments of FDR's policies in response to the Great Depression, not because it was in agreement with conventional wisdom.
Click to expand...

I have only ever heard it as conventional wisdom from historians, which is probably what your thought process is basing this off of. We were all told and sold the story that FDR's New Deal eventually got us out of a depression and saved the country.
The truth?
His own New Deal architect admitted continuing the same bad policies Hoover did and even after FDR started the New Deal, by 1937, unemployment that had started to fall with shortterm government deficit spending had gone right back up again to 19 percent. It was only the war and the devastation in Europe that forced them to buy American goods again, despite the tariffs.

Most economists then and now were repulsed by the policies of more government spending and protectionism.
 
KingCondanomation said:
I have only ever heard it as conventional wisdom from historians, which is probably what your thought process is basing this off of. We were all told and sold the story that FDR's New Deal eventually got us out of a depression and saved the country.
The truth?
His own New Deal architect admitted continuing the same bad policies Hoover did and even after FDR started the New Deal, by 1937, unemployment that had started to fall with shortterm government deficit spending had gone right back up again to 19 percent. It was only the war and the devastation in Europe that forced them to buy American goods again, despite the tariffs.

Most economists then and now were repulsed by the policies of more government spending and protectionism.
Click to expand...


Empty barrels . . .
 
Dungheap said:
You're just being an idiot for the sake of being an idiot. My responses in this thread have been limited to combating the assertion that there is "no question" that FDR prolonged the Great Depression. In fact, there is plenty of doubt that his policies did prolong the Depression, as most economists and historians do not subscribe to this theory.

Maybe conventional wisdom is wrong, but that doesn't mean that there is "no question" that FDR's policies prolonged the Great Depression.

That's why your questions were fucking stupid if directed at me. I'm not saying that conventional wisdom is correct or even plausible. All I'm saying is that the idea that there is "no question" that FDR prolonged the Great Depression, something Southern Man and Dano seem to take as a given, is seriously flawed and the result of an abundance of ignorance.
Click to expand...

Abundance of ignorance? Have you posted any facts and numbers supporting your argument?

Let's say hypothetically that things were to stay just as bad under Obama because of spending policies he enacted wherein he KNEW that things would not get better. And then they finally did get better in his final time in office, would people blame him for the extension of bad times or would they see him as a saviour who "eventually" got us out of the mess Bush made?
 
Watermark said:
I'm pretty sure a certain nobel-prize winning economist named Paul Krugman disagrees with you guys anyway.
Click to expand...

Hmm, probably would. But he would
A) Be one economist
and
B) Be an economist whose field is in trade and did not study the affects of FDR's policy in relation to the data from that time as these 2 economists from UCLA did.

But oh he has that nobel prize! All must bow down to he who holds the glittering gold medallion and accept his words as fact without question!
110px-Nobel_medal_dsc06171.png
 
Dungheap said:
You're just being an idiot for the sake of being an idiot. My responses in this thread have been limited to combating the assertion that there is "no question" that FDR prolonged the Great Depression. In fact, there is plenty of doubt that his policies did prolong the Depression, as most economists and historians do not subscribe to this theory.

Maybe conventional wisdom is wrong, but that doesn't mean that there is "no question" that FDR's policies prolonged the Great Depression.

That's why your questions were fucking stupid if directed at me. I'm not saying that conventional wisdom is correct or even plausible. All I'm saying is that the idea that there is "no question" that FDR prolonged the Great Depression, something Southern Man and Dano seem to take as a given, is seriously flawed and the result of an abundance of ignorance.
Click to expand...
"No question" is an assertion they make based on information provided here and is a sign of an opinion.

Your argument on this thread with them is their opinion is "wrong" because of "conventional wisdom" existing against their opinion.

Hence I began to have questions about whether or not you believe that "conventional wisdom" is right, and therefore asked a couple.

Now you have answered that question and we can begin a side conversation about whether or not you believe that FDR saved all of us from doom, or whether he may have prolonged the problem we were facing.

Your assumption that I am in any way supporting another person's opinion through my question is where you go off course. Your posts to me have been baseless inanities of assumption rather than purposeful answers to direct questions that attempted to start a different conversation.

It is my opinion that FDR, because he made the populace again believe that there was an end to the bad economy, helped rather than harmed. It didn't matter what form it took, even deficit spending, so long as it made people believe that an end was coming it became a self-fulfilling prophecy.
 
Watermark said:
I've read "The Fountainhead". It was difficult.
Click to expand...
Well that's impressive if it's true. The Fountainhead doesn't really explain the why in terms of what's behind leftist thought.
Atlas Shrugged is required to really understand Rand, "We the living" and Anthem are not necessary.
 
Damocles said:
"No question" is an assertion they make based on information provided here and is a sign of an opinion.

Your argument on this thread with them is their opinion is "wrong" because of "conventional wisdom" existing against their opinion.

Hence I began to have questions about whether or not you believe that "conventional wisdom" is right, and therefore asked a couple.

Now you have answered that question and we can begin a side conversation about whether or not you believe that FDR saved all of us from doom, or whether he may have prolonged the problem we were facing.

Your assumption that I am in any way supporting another persons opinion through my question is where you go off course. Your posts to me have been baseless inanities of assumption rather than purposeful answers to direct questions.
Click to expand...


Saying that there is "no question" that FDR prolonged the Great Depression is just flat out wrong. 100% incorrect. There is no room for dispute on this. In fact, most economists agree that FDR's policies did not as a whole prolong the Great Depression. Their opinion is wrong and unsupportable.

By the way, stop using inane and any variant thereof. It's the most overused word on this board.
 
Dungheap said:
Saying that there is "no question" that FDR prolonged the Great Depression is just flat out wrong. 100% incorrect. There is no room for dispute on this. In fact, most economists agree that FDR's policies did not as a whole prolong the Great Depression. Their opinion is wrong and unsupportable.

By the way, stop using inane and any variant thereof. It's the most overused word on this board.
Click to expand...
Saying that there is "no question" is again, a statement of their opinion, what I am trying to root out from you is YOUR opinion, not of whether or not some other economist has a "question", but of WHAT you believe happened at that time.

Do you believe, in fact, that it was the deficit spending that saved us or do you believe something different?
 
Damocles said:
Saying that there is "no question" is again, a statement of their opinion, what I am trying to root out from you is YOUR opinion, not of whether or not some other economist has a "question", but of WHAT you believe happened at that time.

Do you believe, in fact, that it was the deficit spending that saved us or do you believe something different?
Click to expand...

Gawd saved us, we were a nation under gawd back then.

A great depression now will be much different than the other one.
People and their living situations are much different. In eastern KY the great depression did not have too much impact on people. they had very little anyway, and were mostly self sufficient . But now they are not.
 
uscitizen said:
Gawd saved us, we were a nation under gawd back then.

A great depression now will be much different than the other one.
People and their living situations are much different. In eastern KY the great depression did not have too much impact on people. they had very little anyway, and were mostly self sufficient . But now they are not.
Click to expand...
Gawd is us, therefore Gawd can't help but to 'save us' if any saving was done.

Again, I'll restate for Dung, if he does in fact want to participate in a side conversation.

It is my opinion that FDR, by doing something, did in fact help the economy recover. That Hoover started too late. Even though FDR continued the same processes started by Hoover he still gets the credit for them, which is all well and good.

I believe that he helped rather than hindered because people began to believe that there would be an end to the Depression and that became a self-fulfilling prophecy. Had he not spent in deficit but found some other way to get that belief out to people it would have had the same effect.
 
Blame for Great Depression:

Monetary Policy = 70%
Hoover = 10%
FDR = 10%
Free Markets = 10%

So in my detailed scientific reserch Government policy is responsible for 90%.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top