Saturday, July 30, 2011
To Those Who Think That the Country Needs Another FDR Type Progressive as President
THIS............“We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and if I am wrong...somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. … And an enormous debt to boot."............Henry Morgenthau, Jr. FDR's Secretary of the Treasury to his fellow Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee May 9th 1939
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
So what if Morgenthau was Secretary of the Treasury under FDR? I agree with him as much as I agree with Timmy Geithner.
Henry Morgenthau was wrong, as are you.
We need to get a lot more progressive. It's the only way the country is not going to go down the toilet.
Morgenthau, though, WAS a New Dealer. The unemployment rate ticked back up to 20% in 1939, after nearly 7 1/2 years of this idiotic central planning. Oh, yeah, the New Deal was sooooooooo frigging successful.
Will: Morgenthau, though, WAS a New Dealer.
The quote you posted say otherwise. Actually, "Morgenthau was an orthodox economist who opposed Keynesian economics and disapproved of some elements of Roosevelt's New Deal".
He sounds marginally onboard to me.
Will: The unemployment rate ticked back up to 20% in 1939...
I think you mean 1938, but otherwise you are correct. Except the reason wasn't because the New Deal wasn't working, but because "in June 1937, some of Roosevelt's advisors urged spending cuts to balance the budget. WPA rolls were drastically cut and PWA projects were slowed to a standstill. The American economy took a sharp downturn in mid-1937, lasting for 13 months through most of 1938" (Source: Wikipedia/Recession of 1937–1938).
The New Deal WAS very frigging successful. The fact the unemployment went back up when the New Deal polices were prematurely scaled back proves it.
FDR thought enough of him to appoint him (and act that "enraged conservatives", according to your source) and keep him in the job for the better part of 6 years. He must have been seen by FDR as a little bit more than "marginally on board".............Again, your putting forth a THEORY as to why the unemployment rate went up (a theory that Mr. Morgenthau - a person who was actually INVOLVED in the policy - evidently disagrees with). Other possibilities include the the fact that the Federal Reserve tightened the money supply and the unionization movement of 1937 was majorly increasing the cost of labor. We don't know anything for sure, wd.
A leader who surrounds himself with "yes men" is not a good leader (this is, I think, what George bush did). You seem to think it is standard procedure.
The "theory" I put forth is the one I strongly believe is what actually happened. The other theories are wrong.
Even if that isn't the case, I fail to see why that means the blue dog fiscal polices you support are the policies we should follow. That makes absolutely no sense.
What you're saying is, "Hey, we don't know anything for sure... so we should do what I want to do". WTF?
Anyway... I predict the United States government will eventually move toward more progressive policies. When the people finally wake up and realize the Right-wing and Moderate polices aren't working. They will rise up and demand it. Mark my words.
We need a lot fewer progressives. The way to get the country out of the toilet is to decentralize control. Not give more and more power to those who rule us.
Folk's,there was one person and one person alone who was responsible for any success FDR and his policies had.....yep,Adolf Hitler.If old Adolf had'nt shown up on the scene FDR would have left office with unemployment at over 20% and the country mired in a depression.
So, what Rusty is saying is that FDR didn't go far enough -- he didn't spend enough to get the US out of the Republican Great Depression (RGD). What else is government spending during time of war but a giant stimulus?
I must say I agree with Rusty's call for more government spending to stimulate the economy and higher taxes to pay for it.
Some facts that prove FDR, Rusty and I are right about government spending and taxes...
...during the Great Depression, federal spending was never more than 11% of GDP... President Franklin Delano Roosevelt wanted to push spending harder than Congress did, but he didn't have much luck...
Roosevelt had much more luck persuading Congress to spend on the war. By 1942, spending climbed 121.7% of GDP... (Information from the 1/14/2010 USA Today article, "Depression, WWII lessons for economic recovery? Sacrifice").
The article also points out that during the RGP taxes reached a high of 64%, but to pay for the war that figure was increased to 94%.
I have to disagree with Rusty on one point however... I think the RGD was over before the start of WWII. But I think Rusty is 100 percent correct regarding the level of spending and taxation. If FDR had spent more and raised taxes higher the RGD would have been a lot shorter.
What I'm trying to say, wd, is that this is just as much of aa art as it is a science (and, no, I'm not always right, either), a balancing-act, too. And I'm not necessarily anti-Keynesian. Investment in infrastructure, along with a revamped regulatory system (get rid of the stupid regs and bring in some decent ones), can sometimes be helpful. But it has to be smart spending; none of these frigging make-work jobs bullshit, bridges to nowhere, etc.. Obama should have found X # of roads, bridges, schools, etc. and fixed them. That instead of this wasteful buckshot approach of the stimulus package.
Will said: "But it has to be smart spending; none of these frigging make-work jobs bullshit, bridges to nowhere, etc.. Obama should have found X # of roads, bridges, schools, etc. and fixed them."
We need to repeal "prevailing wage" and the Davis Bacon act, and instead require government to contract with the best. Not those who overcharge.
It would save over $10 billion per year. Imagine if this money instead went to fund new projects and needed work, which would be a 10% increase... and leave the government better able to devote scarce resources toward doing what it is supposed to do.
Ten billion a year sounds good, dmarks. Count me in (that and on getting rid of the funding for NPR, too).
I'm glad WD agrees with me that what we need right now is a big,gigantic honkin sized friggin war.WD and I are in total agreement (go figure)on this one....we need a BIG war,we need to get Rosie the Riveter back in her coveralls,we need to be turning our tin cans into battle ships.WD and I rearly agree on anything,but we are solid on this subject.Lets invade Canada,just like in Canadian Bacon...lets go get those hoser's.F#@k it lets get Mexico at the same time,fight on two fronts.
You're my boy WD!!!!!
"Lets invade Canada,just like in Canadian Bacon"
My favorite Michael Moore movie
(My blog post lauding Moore is coming later this week, if not todaY)
Post a Comment