Would another "Great Depression" mean the end of America?

[SpurNation]

Times are different than back in 1929 but thankfully my grandfather is still alive from that era and has recounted many instances of growing up in that period.

His speculation is that if this country were to have to suffer through a depression like the 30's it would subcomb to another country either via physical invasion or fiscal manipulation.

Could this be the reason for the financial bailout of the banks?

[Wild Cobra]

Could this be the reason for the financial bailout of the banks?
Absolutely. Create a large enough debt, and other countries can no loner keep the dollar stable. Once it drops on the world marker, the democrats will cause another repression, and give them all the reason in the world to nationalize everything like the Nazi's did to Germany.

[clambake]

pffft

[SpurNation]

I'll interject another point my grandfather made regarding this. Back in the 30's there were government programs aimed at helping people who wanted to work...today there are government programs providing for those who don't want to work.

[Wild Cobra]

I'll interject another point my grandfather made regarding this. Back in the 30's there were government programs aimed at helping people who wanted to work...today there are government programs providing for those who don't want to work.
I'll gladly trade them for some Mexicans and Chinese that have work ethics.

[SouthernFried]

I'll interject another point my grandfather made regarding this. Back in the 30's there were government programs aimed at helping people who wanted to work...today there are government programs providing for those who don't want to work.


This is probably the most profound point I've heard on this, or any other board...in a very, very long time.

:toast to your grandfather.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

I'll interject another point my grandfather made regarding this. Back in the 30's there were government programs aimed at helping people who wanted to work...today there are government programs providing for those who don't want to work.
dems need those programs to stay in business. their investment in the KKK kinda had a snag.

[SonOfAGun]

It'd definitely be different seeing as how no one in this day and age grows their own food save a few.

Invaded by another country though? No.

[boutons_deux]

"today there are government programs providing for those who don't want to work."

There are millions of people right now who are out of work thanks to the banksters, people with good credit and prime rate mortgages, that want to work and can't find it, are losing their homes now or very soon.

but if Magic Negro tried to "make work" the way Roosevelt did, he would be shouted down by Repug-incited mobs and asshole Sentors like Grassly and similar ilk. The Repugs, and many here on this board, want Magic Negro to fail, no matter what he and Dems try to do, and no matter how much pain failure will inflict on millions of people. It's call All Politics, All The Time (and fuck America).

[Extra Stout]

People don't realize how very, very close the USA came to collapse or revolution during FDR's time. In the 1930's, a lot of people thought the Depression proved that capitalism and liberal democracy were failures, and were willing to turn to fascism or communism. For FDR to steer the country through was a major accomplishment.

If it were to happen today, we would simply descend into chaos.

[boutons_deux]

"For FDR to steer the country through was a major accomplishment."

... and conservatives and Repugs think FDR was one of the worst presidents whose accomplishments must be undone (and dubya placed on Mt Rushmore :lol).

[SpurNation]

"For FDR to steer the country through was a major accomplishment."

... and conservatives and Repugs think FDR was one of the worst presidents whose accomplishments must be undone (and dubya placed on Mt Rushmore :lol).

Where are you getting that information...from my experience in talking to people (most conservatives included) think FDR was a savior for this country.

By the way....FDR was more conservative in action than most moderate conservatives of today and definately more democratic than most democrats of today.

[boutons_deux]

go look up what the neo-cons think about FDR

[hope4dopes]

I think it really could balkanize the nation and people may want to opt out of the federal state thing.FDR didn't do shit our prosperity came after the war when we were they only industrial nation on the planet that wasn't bombed into rubble.

[polysylab1k]

Another "Great Depression" only means the end of a government which is already ruined by a socialist and his claws, the 50 states are perpetual.

[SouthernFried]

Govt spending is out of control...and the most out of control aspects of it, are a direct result of FDR.

If your upset at the dependency on Govt now, and people who look more and more to govt to take care of them. If you don't like the socialist, collectivist bent this country is taking away from the freedom and individual Liberty the founders of this country supported...

You have to look no farther than FDR. Who is the father of this movement in the US.

"but..but...he saved us during the great depression!"

Actually, he prolonged the Great Depression, just like Obama is prolonging and worsening this recession...

[Nbadan]

Govt spending is out of control...and the most out of control aspects of it, are a direct result of FDR.

If your upset at the dependency on Govt now, and people who look more and more to govt to take care of them. If you don't like the socialist, collectivist bent this country is taking away from the freedom and individual Liberty the founders of this country supported...

You have to look no farther than FDR. Who is the father of this movement in the US.

"but..but...he saved us during the great depression!"

Actually, he prolonged the Great Depression, just like Obama is prolonging and worsening this recession...

:rolleyes

That's the stupidest wing-nut re-creation of history on the fucken planet

[Nbadan]

I'll interject another point my grandfather made regarding this. Back in the 30's there were government programs aimed at helping people who wanted to work...today there are government programs providing for those who don't want to work.

there also was no social net, so we had things like malnutrition of children, out-breaks of controllable disease, and soup kitchen - happy days!

:rolleyes

[SouthernFried]

there also was no social net, so we had things like malnutrition of children, out-breaks of controllable disease, and soup kitchen - happy days!

:rolleyes

If you listen to the left...we still have all those things.

plus the Trillions of debt

[whottt]

:rolleyes

That's the stupidest wing-nut re-creation of history on the fucken planet

Do you think spelling it "fucken" is somehow less profane than spelling it correctly?

Just curious.

[whottt]

I think a great depression would be good for the country...basically we are a bunch of spoiled ass brats that have never known need or want in generations at the National level...Great depressions tend to force you to get in touch with what's really important. The generation that came out of the great depression was one of the most productive and in touch with reality in American history...I don't think that'd be a bad thing.


I don't think it'd be a bad thing if it forced the break up of the US either. States that want to be a part of the US should be able to do so and states that don't shouldn't have too.

If the country is growing apart it's just as much a factor of evolution as it is anything else...there's nothing positive abount forcing massing groups of people into some collective group they don't want to be in...it will only lead to conflict.

It's like trying to make bad marriage work...


I also don't think it would lead to civil war...depends on which group wants the secession...the Red states would actively celebrate the dissolution of the Uniion...it's the blue states that don't want it, and never did(except when Bush was President).


Hopefully Sarah will get elected President and when the big blue states want to secede...we can all just agree to go our separate ways.


I don't support the Iraqis being forced to be united in some geographical prison, so I damn sure don't support it for my own country.

Bring on the depression, and the dissolution of the union...we won't have to worry about carrying the burden of being the world leader anymore either, so maybe Russia, China and Usama will like us then and I know that's(world leader) a burden liberals have been wantiing to shed for a while now:tu


Just split it up by political party...it already is idelogically anyway.


I pretty much despise all liberals at this stage, but I have absolutely no problem with them being allowed to go their separate way and have their own country...more power to them. Just make sure both side get the nukes....for a war deterrent.

[whottt]

People don't realize how very, very close the USA came to collapse or revolution during FDR's time. In the 1930's, a lot of people thought the Depression proved that capitalism and liberal democracy were failures, and were willing to turn to fascism or communism. For FDR to steer the country through was a major accomplishment.

If it were to happen today, we would simply descend into chaos.


Uh, the epitome of facism is forcing people to stay together when they don't want to do so.

[SpurNation]

Govt spending is out of control...and the most out of control aspects of it, are a direct result of FDR.

If your upset at the dependency on Govt now, and people who look more and more to govt to take care of them. If you don't like the socialist, collectivist bent this country is taking away from the freedom and individual Liberty the founders of this country supported...

You have to look no farther than FDR. Who is the father of this movement in the US.

"but..but...he saved us during the great depression!"

Actually, he prolonged the Great Depression, just like Obama is prolonging and worsening this recession...

Yes & No. FDR was basically forced to take radical means to solve a dire situation. It was at this time that we first saw the marriage of big business and government intervention. Sure there were some business/government interaction before this time but not on the scale that was about to happen.

Not only was the economy in the pits...agriculture, farm and ranch, industry, everything associated with life in this country was affected by the depression.

Instead of withering and allowing facists, communist and socialist extremes take over the political system...FDR put people to work. Infrastructure programs, National Resources, Agriculture were all saved through the various programs deerived from the FDR administration.

It was truly a time when people HAD to work with each other. Was there discourse amongst some...sure. But these programs were never intended to become staple of America. They were developed to help a starving, deteriating country to get back on it's feet.

But the dynamics of this country changed at that time...people were forced to flock to tent cities, labor camps and migration groups. And big business was more than happy to supply it's new found customer...the U.S. Government.

Raw materials, food, labor and transportation all were in extreme demand now. And it had to happen so fast that labor laws were non-existent at that time. Fairness wasn't even thought about because people were just happy to keep their families fed and some sort of shelter over their heads.

FDR made sure private industry were "partners" in this endeavor. And in doing so he vehimanately refused to allow government to become socialistic or communist.

Of course there were risks, but to not do anything other than the programs he helped to establish as a temporary means to pull the country out of total colapse was better than the alternatives that were quickly setting foot across the nation. And though not single handedly...FDR made sure that free enterprise was going to be the one thing this country did not loose.

[DarkReign]

Cataclysm is the harbinger of humility.

[SouthernFried]

And in doing so he vehimanately refused to allow government to become socialistic or communist.

I can understand such projects as the WPA, which people put to work...and even the Fair labor stuff...

But, SS is about as socialist as you can get. This was not a "temporary" make work program. It was designed to be socialist, and it was designed to last forever. Today, SS is our biggest drain on resources. This is FDR.

Remember, FDR wanted to put much, much more socialist stuff into govt. I don't know how many times his proposals were ruled "unconstitutional" by the courts. He took us off Gold standard, started Fannie May, FDIC, etc...these were giant govt takeovers...these were not make work programs. And, many of these programs, are destroying the economic viability of the US, imho...

FDR is the father of modern day US socialism and big govt.

Whether or not you think he wanted to do it or not...he did. I think he wanted to myself. But, differing folks may...differ.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I can understand such projects as the WPA, which people put to work...and even the Fair labor stuff...

But, SS is about as socialist as you can get. This was not a "temporary" make work program. It was designed to be socialist, and it was designed to last forever. Today, SS is our biggest drain on resources. This is FDR.

Remember, FDR wanted to put much, much more socialist stuff into govt. I don't know how many times his proposals were ruled "unconstitutional" by the courts. He took us off Gold standard, started Fannie May, FDIC, etc...these were giant govt takeovers...these were not make work programs. And, many of these programs, are destroying the economic viability of the US, imho...

FDR is the father of modern day US socialism and big govt.

Whether or not you think he wanted to do it or not...he did. I think he wanted to myself. But, differing folks may...differ.

This is hilarious. FDR is the father of the military industrious complex that we see today.

The entire idea of SS was that you pay into for the whole of your life and then are repaid after you retire. Its not even remotely a simple handout.

What has happened is you have seen money 'borrowed' from SS to pay for arms races concurrent with tax cuts *cough* Reagan *cough* and then subsequently to pay for the massive interest on debt accumulated.

To say that SS is the biggest drag is just ignorant. Look at national 'defense' costs and how much we pay in interest of the debt and get back to me

[TeyshaBlue]

go look up what the neo-cons think about FDR

neo-cons are not the same as conservatives.

[Wild Cobra]

neo-cons are not the same as conservatives.Don't bother, you're wasting your time. He's a libtard. The libtards here purposely call conservatives neocons. Must have something to do with the thought of neoNazi, or just ignorance. Either way, they are too retarded to stop.

[SouthernFried]

This is hilarious. FDR is the father of the military industrious complex that we see today.

The entire idea of SS was that you pay into for the whole of your life and then are repaid after you retire. Its not even remotely a simple handout.

What has happened is you have seen money 'borrowed' from SS to pay for arms races concurrent with tax cuts *cough* Reagan *cough* and then subsequently to pay for the massive interest on debt accumulated.

To say that SS is the biggest drag is just ignorant. Look at national 'defense' costs and how much we pay in interest of the debt and get back to me

I don't know where to begin...

SS is a govt socialist program to take care of you. It was unconstitutional in its format, so they changed it in the 50's to go into the General Fund...instead of getting rid of it. It's not been "borrowed"...cuz there never was anything set aside, it was deemed unconstitutional to do it. It went directly into the General Fund and it's been used to fund...everything. Not just "Reagan" and the interest on the debt. sigh...

It's a total screwup...and it's totally socialist Govt involvement.

As far as the biggest cost, and SS not being the biggest?

2008 BUDGET

$608 billion - Social Security
$386 billion - Medicare
$209 billion - Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program
$324 billion - Unemployment/Welfare/Other mandatory spending

Total SOCIAL SPENDING 1.527 TRILLION DOLLARS

$481.4 billion - Department of Defense


$261 billion - Interest on National Debt

And just to put things in "perspective"....Obama's "stimulus package" is around 800 BILLION.

...and so it goes.

[Wild Cobra]

To say that SS is the biggest drag is just ignorant. Look at national 'defense' costs and how much we pay in interest of the debt and get back to me
That's what I forgot. I need to add interest on the debt to this chart:

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x262/Wild_Cobra/Politics/SpendingvsRevenueinGNP.jpg

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I don't know where to begin...

SS is a govt socialist program to take care of you. It was unconstitutional in its format, so they changed it in the 50's to go into the General Fund...instead of getting rid of it. It's not been "borrowed"...cuz there never was anything set aside, it was deemed unconstitutional to do it. It went directly into the General Fund and it's been used to fund...everything. Not just "Reagan" and the interest on the debt. sigh...

It's a total screwup...and it's totally socialist Govt involvement.

As far as the biggest cost, and SS not being the biggest?

2008 BUDGET

$608 billion - Social Security
$386 billion - Medicare
$209 billion - Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program
$324 billion - Unemployment/Welfare/Other mandatory spending

Total SOCIAL SPENDING 1.527 TRILLION DOLLARS

$481.4 billion - Department of Defense


$261 billion - Interest on National Debt

And just to put things in "perspective"....Obama's "stimulus package" is around 800 BILLION.

...and so it goes.

Begin by adding interest off the debt and defense spending like I said. Then compare it to SS which is what we were talking about. The bait and switch is cute and all.....

The two go very hand in hand. Reagan started the trillion dololar deficiets with his arms race in the early to mid eighties. Its either that or you can always claim that Reagan was a socialist.

[SpurNation]

I can understand such projects as the WPA, which people put to work...and even the Fair labor stuff...

But, SS is about as socialist as you can get. This was not a "temporary" make work program. It was designed to be socialist, and it was designed to last forever. Today, SS is our biggest drain on resources. This is FDR.

Remember, FDR wanted to put much, much more socialist stuff into govt. I don't know how many times his proposals were ruled "unconstitutional" by the courts. He took us off Gold standard, started Fannie May, FDIC, etc...these were giant govt takeovers...these were not make work programs. And, many of these programs, are destroying the economic viability of the US, imho...

FDR is the father of modern day US socialism and big govt.

Whether or not you think he wanted to do it or not...he did. I think he wanted to myself. But, differing folks may...differ.

I totally agree with what it has become today. Unfortunately some of the necessary programs started in the 1930's have evolved to wasteful government of today and even opposite than what they were first intended to do at the time.

Democrats now are not the same Democrats of that era. They are now Libertarian Socialist under the guise of the Democrat label.

[SouthernFried]

Begin by adding interest off the debt and defense spending like I said. The two go very hand in hand. Reagan started the trillion dololar deficiets with his arms race in the early to mid eighties. Its either that or you can always claim that Reagan was a socialist.

I'm not sure I understand. You want to add "interest on the debt" to "defense spending?" Because you think defense spending is the major item in our budget and all the interest on the debt should be attributed to it?

When I've plainly shown you differently?

hmmm, so it goes...

[SouthernFried]

I totally agree with what it has become today. Unfortunately some of the necessary programs started in the 1930's have evolved to wasteful government of today and even opposite than what they were first intended to do at the time.

Democrats now are not the same Democrats of that era. They are now Libertarian Socialist under the guise of the Democrat label.

Yeah, lesson learned. Don't ever start a govt program expecting it to be done away with when the "current crisis" is over. It doesn't happen that way.

The lesson was learned by one of Obama's people when he said..."never waste a crisis" in trying to get govt programs like the stimulus passed.

too late now I guess....

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I'm not sure I understand. You want to add "interest on the debt" to "defense spending?" Because you think defense spending is the major item in our budget and all the interest on the debt should be attributed to it?

When I've plainly shown you differently?

hmmm, so it goes...

Its called stealing from Peter to pay for Paul. I'm not going to bother dredging through all of the ways and means BS but it boils down to this. SS is more or less a pool of money that the fed pulls from to pay for particular projects.

Reagan really started doing this in the early eighties when he would pull from SS to fund his defense projects concurrent with cutting taxes. Not only did he raise SS for the future and the national debt at the same time. Defense Spending per GDP overall has increased since that time signifigantly.

http://www.data360.org/temp/dsg539_500_350.jpg

Now he did appoint Greenspan who curbed inflation but I digress.

When you do this, you inflate the cost in the future. What your trying to do is look at this in a vacuum which posits nothing.

[Wild Cobra]

Its called stealing from Peter to pay for Paul. I'm not going to bother dredging through all of the ways and means BS but it boils down to this. SS is more or less a pool of money that the fed pulls from to pay for particular projects.

Reagan really started doing this in the early eighties when he would pull from SS to fund his defense projects concurrent with cutting taxes. Not only did he raise SS for the future and the national debt at the same time. Defense Spending per GDP overall has increased since that time signifigantly.

Wow... How do you figure that? Social security has always been used by the government for other programs. Defense spending was already 5.4% of GDP when Reagan took office. It went as high as 6.5% while he was in office. It was lowered to 4.7% at the end of Bush(41)'s term. A proper amount once we won the Cold War. Ongoing operations has the defense spending at 4.5% for 2008. What is your source that it is ever increasing?

Here's mine:

White House; OMB; Table 15.5—Total Government Expenditures by Major Category of Expenditure as Percentages of GDP: 1948–2008 (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2010/assets/hist15z5.xls)

[SouthernFried]

Its called stealing from Peter to pay for Paul. I'm not going to bother dredging through all of the ways and means BS but it boils down to this. SS is more or less a pool of money that the fed pulls from to pay for particular projects.

Reagan really started doing this in the early eighties when he would pull from SS to fund his defense projects concurrent with cutting taxes. Not only did he raise SS for the future and the national debt at the same time. Defense Spending per GDP overall has increased since that time signifigantly.

http://www.data360.org/temp/dsg539_500_350.jpg

Now he did appoint Greenspan who curbed inflation but I digress.

When you do this, you inflate the cost in the future. What your trying to do is look at this in a vacuum which posits nothing.

Again, I don't know really how to begin.

SS was never a pool of money set aside that Reagan "started" using for projects, or whatever. It's been going into the General Fund since the 50's. It's been used for every single govt spending program since then. There is no "set aside" that anyone (uh, including Reagan) could pull from. They all used it...before, and since Reagan. Reagan didn't start it, or finish it...or use it any differently than anyone else.

"When you do this, you inflate the cost in the future. What your trying to do is look at this in a vacuum which posits nothing"

I don't know what your talking about here. Will using SS money, as all our administrations have done, inflate costs in the future? Govt spending, in general, inflates costs, not sure what difference using SS money makes...since it's all a part of govt spending.

Greenspan didn't curb inflation...the marketplace did. Sound fiscal and monetary policy didn't hurt. But, Greenspan is given far too much credit for things. I have an MBA, and I couldn't understand half the crap he said. I would talk to fellow investors who would smile and say the same thing. "nobody knows what he's saying, he likes it that way." Good for job security I guess. He didn't do anything differently than a "good" money manager would....uh, imho :)

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Again, I don't know really how to begin.

SS was never a pool of money set aside that Reagan "started" using for projects, or whatever. It's been going into the General Fund since the 50's. It's been used for every single govt spending program since then. There is no "set aside" that anyone (uh, including Reagan) could pull from. They all used it...before, and since Reagan. Reagan didn't start it, or finish it...or use it any differently than anyone else.

"When you do this, you inflate the cost in the future. What your trying to do is look at this in a vacuum which posits nothing"

I don't know what your talking about here. Will using SS money, as all our administrations have done, inflate costs in the future? Govt spending, in general, inflates costs, not sure what difference using SS money makes...since it's all a part of govt spending.

Greenspan didn't curb inflation...the marketplace did. Sound fiscal and monetary policy didn't hurt. But, Greenspan is given far too much credit for things. I have an MBA, and I couldn't understand half the crap he said. I would talk to fellow investors who would smile and say the same thing. "nobody knows what he's saying, he likes it that way." Good for job security I guess. He didn't do anything differently than a "good" money manager would....uh, imho :)

You can't understand because you took the easy route and went administration instead of finance. Its like taking biology --the easy route-- and not physics and then complaining that you don't understand Feynman.

It was actually Volckur who was appointed by Carter but he raised the interest by about 50%. That is serious market intervention and to say that the market just corrected itself is laughable.

The social security fund is NOT part of the general fund so try again.

what the government uses is the surplus from that and Reagan started this bullshit with his massive trillion dollar deficits.

[SouthernFried]

The social security fund is NOT part of the general fund so try again.

what the government uses is the surplus from that and Reagan started this bullshit with his massive trillion dollar deficits.

sigh...

Social Security revenues go into Treasury general revenue and are credited to the Fund as unmarketable Treasury bonds (IOU's.) The Treasury pays benefits with general revenue. Any remaining revenue finances general government, with an equivalent value of bonds (meaning IOU's) in the Trust Fund as Social Security’s "surplus." That’s a Treasury account in action, not a trust fund.

The original SS act mandated any surplus in SS revenues goes to fund the govt. Reagan didn't do this.

Social Security’s Trust Fund is bogus. Meaning the "robbing the trust fund" issue is phony, too.