great myths of the great depression

[Jeff_in_Atl]

http://www.mackinac.org/archives/1998/sp1998-01.pdf

Just wondering if anybody else went to school with the school books celbrating Hoover and the social programs he put in place. I did.

[Wild Willy]

Interesting read, and a little scary- a lot of the same phrases and attitudes- "...constant appeals to envy and class hatred..." and "..unscrupulous money lenders...."

The more things change, the more they stay the same. Even the creation of a new (for 1932) government agency, the NRA- National Recovery Administration- Seems like history is repeating all over again- Seems like the country has been down this road once, already, but has forgotten the lessons learned-

Thanks for the history lesson-

[Jeff_in_Atl]

Actually I wasn't really trying to start a debate here. I was just curious if any of ya'll had been taught that the NRA 1932 was the turning point of his country into a great country like I was. I feel a bit duped by it. Funny everybody I have asked this question that went to school in the 60s, 70s, and 80s has said they were taught that it was a wonderful thing too. Learning the truth has been quite a shock. I haven’t really thought about it until recently.

[formula_gramps]

Jeff,

Modern day history textbooks are a lot like today's newspapers.

You need to be able to read them though a really fine mesh crap filter, in order to come away with any nuggets of truth.

[Wild Willy]

I had recently read where FDR had attempted to change the make up of the Supreme Court- but this article explains why- because many of his programs were shown to be unconstitutional- leave it to a democrat to try and stack the supreme court, even back in the 30's and 40's- I thought that legislation by court decisions was a more modern phenomenon

I knew several people who worked in the Civilian Conservation Corp, building camps, bridges, and planting forests- they likened it to being in the army, sleeping i1 dorms and working hard- but, given the bad economic times, they were grateful to have a job and food to eat-

Take a good look at what happened to the country during this time frame, because much of it is being repeated for this generation- the economic 'crisis', the massive government programs being created. History looks like it is repeating itself again-

[FroSSty]

You know, there are a lot of damgerous similarities between The Great Depression and this recession. I am going to spread this one around. Hopefully we can encourage some people to read it.

[formula_gramps]

Frosty,

You're right, there are a lot of similarities.

FDR was not a democrat in the tradional sense of the word. You go back about 100 years and you find that democrats were somewhere between moderate to conservative. Actually, you needn't go back that far. If Jack Kennedy were running for office today, the majority of the mainstream media would be labeling him a hard core right-winger

FDR was a socialist. During one of his terms, he even had a VP that was a communist, a.k.a. Henry Wallace.

This guy we have now is somewhere in between those two. If you look out at the budget projections for the next 8-10 years it is obvious that we are spending money that our grandchildren haven't earned yet. It can't work, and it won't work because simultaneously with this, we are punishing the people who create jobs and invest their assets in equities that help to build businesses.

Not to worry though, we'll all be punished with higher taxes and hyperinflation down the road--- not just the "so-called rich". Obama and his cronies will only be able to play the "class envy" card for just so long. Even if you took 100% of the income of the "rich" in this country you couldn't begin to pay for all the spending that is happening now. So guess who will be paying for it? Got a mirror....the answer is there.

Socialists always think the answer is more government. It's a shame that this country has to repeat the same mistakes that the old USSR and most of Europe have already made, but this is a product of the public education system and the consequential dumbing down of America.

George Santayana's words were never more true:

"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

[Joe 1320]

"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

I've been saying that for years. People don't learn.

[markd79ta]

I had recently read where FDR had attempted to change the make up of the Supreme Court- but this article explains why- because many of his programs were shown to be unconstitutional- leave it to a democrat to try and stack the supreme court, even back in the 30's and 40's- I thought that legislation by court decisions was a more modern phenomenon

I knew several people who worked in the Civilian Conservation Corp, building camps, bridges, and planting forests- they likened it to being in the army, sleeping i1 dorms and working hard- but, given the bad economic times, they were grateful to have a job and food to eat-

Take a good look at what happened to the country during this time frame, because much of it is being repeated for this generation- the economic 'crisis', the massive government programs being created. History looks like it is repeating itself again-

Yep, the supreme court was stacked through attrition and adding judges (to 9 justices). The programs that were found unconstitutional magically became constitutional under the commerce clause.

My under-graduate work was done in History and Political Science. Fortunately for me, I went to a school that taught students how to think rather then what to think. I studied this event, among many, from multiple perspectives.

Anyhow, FDR circumvented the constitution of this country. The constitution as a social contract and the protections it provided were destroyed by these events.

[Bananasaboutcars]

While not your intention to create a debate, I feel the need to take the other side of your and by default the Macinac Center arguments.

First a lot of the debt the government has is due to the military actions of George Bush. How much money has been spent on Iraq? It isnt Obama that ran up that bill. Nice try though.

Second Roosevelt was not a communist. not even close. Communists believe in government control of every aspect of a persons life (like the former soviet union). If you ever traveled to a communist country, you would understand (I was born in a communist country--I speak from experience)
Roosevelt may have increased government intervention but he did it as a politician, one playing to his perception of what his constituents want. His ultimate goal wasnt complete control of the people, it was doing what is necessary to keep himself in office. Also Roosevelt came from a wealthy new york family-not exactly the profile of a communist.

Third, no one their right mind would call JFK conservative, he was one of the most progressive presidents we have ever had. If you take anyone from that era and compare them to someone today, they 1960s person would seem more conservative-- thats the way our civilization has moved.

The current economic environment is a direct result of speculative lending and loose credit standards by banks playing in the real estate financing arena. Their ability to irresponsibly lend money to anyone and everyone, is a direct result of very limited if any government oversight on mortgage lenders. There were no limits the risk that banks could take with our money, and look what happened. In contrast the government has limits on what insurance companies can do and on what securities brokerages can do, guess what-no problems there this time around. Thank government "intervention" during 1932-34 for establishing several critical regulatory bodies limiting what banks, insurance companies and securities brokers can do.

You can also blame government intervention for the unemployment benefits paid to those who have lost their jobs. Back in 1932, the unemployed had to turn to soup kitchens and bread lines just to survive. Dont see that today-thank you government intervention!

finally dont confuse what the term free market means, a free market is one in which no one has pricing power over another, i.e., no one person has advantages. it does not mean a market with no rules or regulation. A market with no rules tends to become a monopoly or oligopoly with a few rich companies controlling everything including prices. this is what happened with the rockefellers and carnegies of the 19th century. Just to remind you- they raised prices as much as they wanted to for Oil and steel, respectively.
Government intervention is often necessary to maintain a true free market, where no one has pricing power, and therefore competition creates efficiency and lower prices. Thank government intervention by another Roosevelt (theodore) for the breakup of monopolies like oil and steel.

The moral of the story is that government intervention, when done correctly is good for the economy and more importantly the social good of the people it serves. The arbitrary absence of government supervision often leads to exploitation by the wealthy, of the poor.

Next time maybe its better to think for yourselves, rather than let a politically motivated think tank like the Macinac Center do it for you.

[Wild Willy]

I agree that Bush ran the debt up- over 8 year, while fighting a war in two countries, and creating several new security agencies-

But the country was working, people were employed, and paying their mortgages- at least until gas spiked at $4 a gallon- Mr Obama has about tripled the debt that Bush grew, in 8 years, in his first 100 days- pretty impressive! He has the feds telling the American manufacturing companies who for hire and fire, how much they can spend on advertising- and the feds own parts of several banks- at what point does it begin to dawn on people that this is creeping big government, taxing everything, controlling everything? Carbon tax credits? What will that do to energy costs, and the power generating companies?

Bush was no prize, granted, but Mr. Obama is making him look like an under-achiever-