One Reson Why the VRWC Tries To Destroy FDR

Here is Franklin Roosevelt, in Madison Square Garden, in 1936:

For nearly four years you have had an Administration which instead of twirling its thumbs has rolled up its sleeves. We will keep our sleeves rolled up. We had to struggle with the old enemies of peace—business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering. They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob. Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me—and I welcome their hatred. I should like to have it said of my first Administration that in it the forces of selfishness and of lust for power met their match. I should like to have it said of my second Administration that in it these forces met their master

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/...+capitalism%29

Today's left would attack him for being too religious and for being against public employee unions. Want to reconsider?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarrinS

Today's left would attack him for being too religious and for being against public employee unions. Want to reconsider?

---

He would be a hero if he were alive and in his prime today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMX7

He would be a hero if he were alive and in his prime today.

---

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_9066

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarrinS

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_9066

---

Good point. The right might have liked him too!

And segregation in the military didn't end until Truman. Hero indeed.

#2 on the Aggregate All-Time Historical Rankings of Presidents

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histori..._United_States


Ranked higher than George Washington...


Yes, hero indeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarrinS

Today's left would attack him for being too religious and for being against public employee unions. Want to reconsider?

---

Nobody's perfect.

Then, as now, unions weren't the problem.

The predatory, corrupt, casino financial sector was, and is, the problem, which is exactly how the VRWC wants it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMX7

Good point. The right might have liked him too!

---

That wasn't a right or left fear. I think you will find the right today doesn't like the idea any better then the left.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarrinS

And segregation in the military didn't end until Truman. Hero indeed.

---

Washington owned slaves. Do you hate him too, Darrin?

How about Jefferson, Madison, Monroe and Jackson?

FDR was a disgrace of a president. England and other European countries had a short recession while FDR made ours last up till the end of ww2. The only reason we had a dip in unemployment numbers was because most of the labor force drafted to fight in the war. The command economy was horrible for small and big buisiness, the govt arbitrarily decided who and what could buy raw materials and were the number one purchaser of all goods. The bank runs, the NRA, and the Agricultural Dept all performed disgracefully. FDR was no anti corporatist either as he continued the practice of Hoovers protectionism, while at the same time instituting price and wage controls.
All these policies were instrumental in leading us to be face fucked for a period of 15 yrs. Fuck FDR, fuck you all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMX7

#2 on the Aggregate All-Time Historical Rankings of Presidents

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histori..._United_States


Ranked higher than George Washington...


Yes, hero indeed.

---

stupid public. If we had FDR right now, we'd all be waiting our turn in line at the soup kitchen. I would illustrate how incompetent that fucking idiot is, but you too are a fucking idiot so i wont waste my time.

Did England and Europe have as severe a depression as USA?

Thanks for proving your a troll for the VRWC.

btw, tell us again how Hoover was solving depression?

"do nothings" = "know nothings"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

Did England and Europe have as severe a depression as USA? "

---

Nope, and i already awnsered why:lol

Quote:

---

Thanks for proving your a troll for the VRWC.

btw, tell us again how Hoover was solving depression?

"do nothings" = "know nothings

---

This is why it's pointless to argue with you. To say that hoover didn't intervene economically is utter idiocy. Not only did he convene all major corporate buisinesses and threaten them with price and wage controls, but he also raised tarrifs to protect american corporate interest, and was ahead in centrally planning our agriculture.. WHen FDR ran against Hoover, he ran on cutting taxes and less intervention. This is a known fact that many of you fuckwads aren't privy too because you've never conducted any real research on the matter. After he was elected he just extended Hoover's economic plans, his own cabintet member stated as such that FDR's economic plan was and extension of hoover's. You dumbfucks are a waste of my time.

Before i argue with any of you idiots. Do me the favor and google these laws. Smoot-Howley Tarrif, Revenue Act of 1932, Emergeny Relief and Reconstruction Act and the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. Then come back and tell me how much Hoover was the anarcho capitalist randian ubermensch you cockroach keynesian dicksuckers think he is.

Why don't you recommend something, Iggy, since you already know so much about it? Surely you didn't rely on the google.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Why don't you recommend something, Iggy, since you already know so much about it? Surely you didn't rely on the google.

---

Thanx for the compliment. Read above..

you're all wrong.

No regulation of the 1920s financial sector enabled the capitalists to fuck themselves up and everybody else.

Pecora and Glass-Steagall gave us stable banking system as ballast to inherently unstable capitalism, until Glass-Steagall was killed, along with lots of other 1930s regulation, the result of which has been to fuck up the USA and European economies.

You VRWC lying shills are a waste of my time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

Before i argue with any of you idiots. Do me the favor and google these laws. Smoot-Howley Tarrif, Revenue Act of 1932, Emergeny Relief and Reconstruction Act and the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. Then come back and tell me how much Hoover was the anarcho capitalist randian ubermensch you cockroach keynesian dicksuckers think he is.

---

Who said anything about Hoover?

Oh, boutons. lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

Thanx for the compliment. Read above..

---

Oh, You edited. Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Who said anything about Hoover?

Oh, boutons. lol

---

The guy who started the thread. It's his thread. lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

The OP on the 13th post.

---

Didn't really see that characterization you cited, though.

I don't have that low an opinion of Hoover tbh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

No regulation of the 1920s financial sector enabled the capitalists to fuck themselves up and everybody else.

Pecora and Glass-Steagall gave us stable banking system as ballast to inherently unstable capitalism, until Glass-Steagall was killed, along with lots of other 1930s regulation, the result of which has been to fuck up the USA and European economies.

You VRWC lying shills are a waste of my time.

---

Glass-Steagall's impact would be minimal if we didn't have a reserve that lowered the interest rates to artificial levels. The CRA, and the Fed Policies are also what led to our current deep hole and compounded it rather than just the GS act. Please, don't argue any further. You're an idiot, and you risk the chance of making yourself a bigger one by arguing economics of which you know shit about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Didn't really see that characterization you cited, though.

I don't have that low an opinion of Hoover tbh.

---

Cool, since nobody was addressing you, your assement wasn't relevant tbh.

who said this... “practically the whole New Deal was extrapolated from programs that Hoover started.”?

WHo was John Nance Garner and why did he claim that hoover was "leading our country down the path to socialism"? Crofl laisezz faire Hoover Crofl Boutons = moron.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

Cool, since nobody was addressing you, your assement wasn't relevant tbh.

---

By your reasoning, no one addressed you in the OP, so your participation here is irrelevant tbh.

That's some stupid reasoning you came up with tbh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

By your reasoning, no one addressed you in the OP, so your participation here is irrelevant tbh.

That's some stupid reasoning you came up with tbh.

---

I hope your agenda was not to show how much of an illiterate jackass you are. Boutons addressed me in this thread, and vice versa. You've intruded into our argument just to get attention, how cute.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

I hope your agenda was not to show how much of an illiterate jackass you are. Boutons addressed me in this thread, and vice versa. You've intruded into our argument just to get attention, how cute.

---

You used your stupid reasoning in a stupid attempt to silence me and declare my opinion irrelevant. How cute.

Where did he address you in the OP?

Let us all know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

You used your stupid reasoning in a stupid attempt to silence me and declare my opinion irrelevant. How cute.

Where did he address you in the OP?

Let us all know.

---

Drama Queens have a penchant to turn any argument and make it about themselves. That's what you've succesfully done here, no longer are we arguing about FDR and Hoover or the great depression. Be proud of yourself. Drama Queen.

Btw, OP also means Original Poster and not just Original Post. I hope that cleared up your confusion. Idiot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

Drama Queens have a penchant to turn any argument and make it about themselves. That's what you've succesfully done here, no longer are we arguing about FDR and Hoover or the great depression. Be proud of yourself. Drama Queen.

---

That's your fault tbh. You just couldn't let my comment go by without making it about me, idiot. You didn't even realize you did it. How cute.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

Btw, OP also means Original Poster and not just Original Post. I hope that cleared up your confusion. Idiot.

---

I was certainly speaking of the latter; you understood it. You initially chimed in without being addressed, so according to your stupid reasoning, you shouldn't be posting in this thread in the first place. How cute.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

That's your fault tbh. You just couldn't let my comment go by without making it about me, idiot. You didn't even realize you did it. How cute.

I was certainly speaking of the latter; you understood it. You initially chimed in without being addressed, so according to your stupid reasoning, you shouldn't be posting in this thread in the first place. How cute.

---

Whatever you're bitching about, it doesn't matter. I was the first who used the term OP, my origianl definition of it is what matters. you then interpreting to mean another thing lies directly to your fault. Don't blame me for your shortcomings. Idiot.

Anyways, what do you have to contribute about FDR or hoover? Please reply, thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

I would illustrate how incompetent that fucking idiot is, but you too are a fucking idiot so i wont waste my time.

---

Too bad. Guess we'll just have to take your word for it that your hand waving is as good as a takedown.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

Whatever you're bitching about, it doesn't matter. I was the one who used the term OP, you then interpreting to mean another thing lies directly to your fault. Don't blame me for your shortcomings. Idiot.

---

You were not addressed initially. That fact has not changed. Idiot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

Anyways, what do you have to contribute about FDR or hoover? Please reply, thanks.

---

I already began to contribute before you started your little tantrum. If you had kept your vagina plugged up for one second and not bled all over the thread, I could have just made my next point and avoided all the drama you crave.

Idiot.

Now I'll wait for you to continue to make it about me. If you can stop your menses for a bit, I'll make my next point about Hoover.

The choice is yours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

You were not addressed initially. That fact has not changed. Idiot.

I already began to contribute before you started your little tantrum. If you had kept your vagina plugged up for one second and not bled all over the thread, I could have just made my next point and avoided all the drama you crave.

Idiot.

Now I'll wait for you to continue to make it about me. If you can stop your menses for a bit, I'll make my next point about Hoover.

The choice is yours.

---

Still nothing.. What do you have to say about FDR or Hoover?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Now I'll wait for you to continue to make it about me. If you can stop your menses for a bit, I'll make my next point about Hoover.

The choice is yours.

---

Your bleeding has not yet stopped tbh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Your bleeding has not yet stopped tbh.

---

Don't project, now what do you have to say about FDR and Hoover?

What would a Repug or anybody have done differently, better than FDR?

What would McLiar have done differently, better than Barry?

And did Europe have a historic drought and dustbowl destroying 10s of 1000s of farmers and their farms along with the financial sector's Great Depression?

What are your recommendations NOW to get the economy moving? We know the crop of 2010 Repugs have suggested NOTHING to create jobs, have done nothing but obstruct, and push the extreme fringe's social/religious issues and union/govt busting, none of which creates jobs.

(the VRWC deficit distraction to destroy govt won't do anything to create jobs, and will, along with Ryan's plan, fuck up the economy even more)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

Don't project, now what do you have to say about FDR and Hoover?

---

Still bitching about me, I see.

This is as fun as it is predictable. You wish you could quit me.

CumDumpster and WhineyHole don't have opinions on subjects so much as they have opinions of other posters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarrinS

CumDumpster and WhineyHole don't have opinions on subjects so much as they have opinions of other posters.

---

Nice contribution to the discussion about Hoover. :tu

I'll be back in a bit to see if you girls have calmed down at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarrinS

CumDumpster and WhineyHole don't have opinions on subjects so much as they have opinions of other posters.

---

Isn't that exactly what you're doing?

I don't see why an alpha male would whine about that, tbh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

I'll be back in a bit to see if you girls have calmed down at all.

---

Failing to discuss topic matter. Calling opponents girls. Yep, that's so chumpdumper. Bye, you won't be missed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

Isn't that exactly what you're doing?

---

More projection. Classic DarrinS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

Failing to discuss topic matter. Calling opponents girls.

---

He might have ripped it from your playbook.

Did chump or WH have an opinion on anything yet? Stay tuned.

Edit: an opinion about me doesn't count

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

He might have ripped it from your playbook.

---

That's fair, although had it been another human being it would have been flattering. Maybe he should start ripping an actual oppinion from whomever it may be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarrinS

Did chump or WH have an opinion on anything yet? Stay tuned.

Edit: an opinion about me doesn't count

---

Alpha male can't read.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

That's fair, although had it been another human being it would have been flattering. Maybe he should start ripping an actual oppinion from whomever it may be.

---

Actually you started all this drama because I stated an opinion on the thread topic. You hypocritically claimed that my post was irrelevant because I was not asked directly to make one.

You were not asked directly to make your first post in this thread either, genius.

Now you and Darrin are comparing notes about me rather than discussing what I was discussing in this thread before you made it about me.

Good job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarrinS

Did chump or WH have an opinion on anything yet? Stay tuned.

---

Iggy is right that boutons take on the history is absurdly simplistic but his own is pretty sketchy too.

My own opinion is that the OP is too incoherent to really pass comment on.

Appears to be garden variety fear mongering; the welfare state might get trimmed, but it isn't going anywhere.

The danger, anyway, is vastly overemphasized. We've been a welfare state for a long time, and will continue to be one for another long time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Iggy is right that boutons take on the history is absurdly simplistic but his own is pretty sketchy too.

---

Agreed. Who knows where either was going in their respective tirades?

Whatever the level of Hoover's interventions, it was perceived as not enough or just the wrong thing to do at the time -- and he was pretty ideologically bound from doing much of anything else. His mishandling of the Bonus Army situation pretty much cemented his reputation as a man who didn't give a shit about or was actively working against the people who were hurt by the Depression.

FDR wasn't hampered by such a strict ideology, as gtown pointed out before he lost his shit. He tried many different approaches to help the economy and the people affected by it; perhaps more importantly he looked like he was working in the interest of the common American and looking out for him. Sure, some of his programs and schemes were ineffective or counterproductive in retrospect or downright dangerous to democracy, but given the alternatives of civil unrest and possible revolutionary movements, what's worse?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Whatever the level of Hoover's interventions, it was perceived as not enough or just the wrong thing to do at the time -- and he was pretty ideologically bound from doing much of anything else. His mishandling of the Bonus Army situation pretty much cemented his reputation as a man who didn't give a shit about or was actively working against the people who were hurt by the Depression.

FDR wasn't hampered by such a strict ideology, as gtown pointed out before he lost his shit. He tried many different approaches to help the economy and the people affected by it; perhaps more importantly he looked like he was working in the interest of the common American and looking out for him. Sure, some of his programs and schemes were ineffective or counterproductive in retrospect or downright dangerous to democracy, but given the alternatives of civil unrest and possible revolutionary movements, what's worse?

---

there was no revolt in Hoover's period. Besides, what FDR did was criminal, impeachable, and if you compare to Europe, we were in a depression for longer and it's all because of FDR. Unemployment didn't skyrocket until the passage of the Smoot Howley Tariff Act, infact a month after the crash, unemployment was a 6%. What Harding/Coolidge did in the 1920 crash was minimal to no intervention, infact tax cuts and letting interest rates rise got them out of the crash within a year. This had to do with the market reallocating it's resources to more productive sectors and letting the bad sectors fail. It worked splendidly compared to the 29 crash. Infact, some facts about those times, taxes were at 24 percent and skyrocketed to 64 percent with Hoover's revenue act. FDR had a complicit press and propagandist help with covering up for his failure.

Not to mention, FDR sacrificed the lives of american soldiers intentionally to draw us into war. FDR is scum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Iggy is right that boutons take on the history is absurdly simplistic but his own is pretty sketchy too.

My own opinion is that the OP is too incoherent to really pass comment on.

Appears to be garden variety fear mongering; the welfare state might get trimmed, but it isn't going anywhere.

---

mine's sketchy, provide proof. I've done my job to bolster my case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

there was no revolt in Hoover's period.

---

:lol thanks for pointing that out, genius.

Quote:

---

Besides, what FDR did was criminal, impeachable, and if you compare to Europe, we were in a depression for longer and it's all because of FDR. Unemployment didn't skyrocket until the passage of the Smoot Howley Tariff Act

---

That was signed into law two years before FDR was elected, and the revenue act was before his time too.

You contradicted yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

:lol thanks for pointing that out, genius.That was signed into law two years before FDR was elected, and the revenue act was before his time too.

You contradicted yourself.

---

Um.. i already stated that hoover signed the smoot howley act and the revenue in a previous post, (Infact that was my whole argument about how Hoover was an interventionist)I don't know how you got that i said FDR, did all that. So obviously i was adressing the whole depression era as a whole. You're not into this conversation anyway, you've proven that you have nothing to offer to this conversation,and you've gone back to being a bitch. bitch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

Um.. i already stated that hoover signed the smoot howley act in a previous post, I don't know how you got that i said FDR signed it. So obviously i was adressing the whole depression era wasn't as bad until you had govt regulation. You're not into this conversation anyway, and you've gone back to being a bitch. bitch.

---

Look, you made a blanket statement about FDR's being solely responsible for worsening the depression, then completely contradicted yourself by blaming pre-FDR laws for worsening the depression.

Just make up your mind and quit whining for once.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Look, you made a blanket statement about FDR being solely responsible for worsening the depression, then completely contradicted yourself by blaming pre-FDR laws for worsening the depression.

Just make up your mind and quit whining for once.

---

If you remember, i was responding to your claim that FDR had it so bad that riots would have ensued, so i had to show that hoover had already gone through the rough parts and he didn't encounter such things. So i had to bring on a time line to address the situation of the GD. Nowhere did i attribute this all to FDR.
I've blamed both Hoover and FDR for the depression. The whole reason i brought up the Howley tarriff and revenue act was to contrast those govt actions with the Harding/Coolidge years. Stick to arguing the topic and stay away from hyperbole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

I've blamed both Hoover and FDR for the depression. The whole reason i brought up the Howley tarriff and revenue act was to contrast those govt actions with the Harding/Coolidge years. Stick to arguing the topic and stay away from hyperbole.

---

The hyperbole was yours.

Quote:

---

we were in a depression for longer and it's all because of FDR

---

Take your own advice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

The hyperbole was yours.Take your own advice.

---

Okay, i see you can't take responsibility for your actions. And yeah, FDR did prolong the depression. Dispute that. IF hoover started it, FDR prolonged it. What's so hard about that?

Who was in charge when the great depression started? I'm asking you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

Okay, i see you can't take responsibility for your actions.

---

I see you can't take responsibility for yours.

It's fun to watch though. The walkback has already begun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

Who was in charge when the great depression started? I'm asking you.

---

The funniest part is I agree with most of what you posted about FDR and Hoover -- without the dramatic cartoon vilification of course -- but it wouldn't be a gtown thread without drama. You just couldn't let your anger go even once.

"we were in a depression for longer and it's all because of FDR"

bull fucking shit. The depression in US was MUCH deeper, and compounded by the Dust Bowl drought and destruction of 1000s of farms when farming was not yet taken over by the corps.

You've really bought the demonization of FDR from the Cato, Hoover, Heritage, AEI, and all the VRWC stink tanks.

And I'm still waiting for you, above all, expert economist, to tell me what FDR should have done, and what Barry should do.

and Europe, esp Germany, did have the Keynesian fiscal stimulus of huge industrialization and arming for war, just like FDR Keynesian fiscal stimulus on entering WWII (btw, US blockade of Pacific shipping scared the hell out of sea-dependent, small island Japan, who felt they HAD to attack the US fleet in defensive retaliation)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

"we were in a depression for longer and it's all because of FDR"

bull fucking shit. The depression in US was MUCH deeper, and compounded by the Dust Bowl drought and destruction of 1000s of farms when farming was not yet taken over by the corps.

You've really bought the demonization of FDR from the Cato, Hoover, Heritage, AEI, and all the VRWC stink tanks.

And I'm still waiting for you, above all, expert economist, to tell me what FDR should have done, and what Barry should do.

and Europe, esp Germany, did have the Keynesian fiscal stimulus of huge industrialization and arming for war, just like FDR Keynesian fiscal stimulus

---

:lmao, i guess you're implying Obama should arm for war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

And I'm still waiting for you, above all, expert economist, to tell me what FDR should have done, and what Barry should do.

---

Cut taxes, cut spending starting with any aid (sorry, entitlements) to the poor, balloon the debt, and pray the rich 'trickle-down'. Is there any other GOP economic plan?

long term, as far as the economy goes, three things come to mind. The US govt. has a responsibility to


1. prevent financial fraud. That means the SEC has got to stop being the banking industry's little bitch and throw some asshole bankers in jail. But that won't happen till......

2. raise capital requirements on banks....by a lot. To the point they can hardly make any money. Creating money should be treated as a sacred duty, not a money making machine for bankers.

3. no more bailouts. America is already experiencing an economic armegeddon. Let the fuckers jump.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

Cut taxes, cut spending starting with any aid (sorry, entitlements) to the poor, balloon the debt, and pray the rich 'trickle-down'. Is there any other GOP economic plan?

---

cutting spending is the only way to erase debt, you could raise more revenue, but only to a point. But history only shows that when we raise revenues we increase spending, so it's a moot point. Cut spending.

History shows there's no interest in erasing debt, whether it's by any spending cuts or increase in revenue. Both parties apply the same Keynesian stimulus, one by granting tax cuts the other by directly writing checks. It all gets kicked forward on the national credit card.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

cutting spending is the only way to erase debt, you could raise more revenue, but only to a point. But history only shows that when we raise revenues we increase spending, so it's a moot point. Cut spending.

---

Debt is money that we already owe, cutting spending doesn't "erase" debt.

But if we do cut spending we'll probably end up hurting the economy. This is what the Fed believes and why wouldn't suddenly taking billions of dollars of spending out of the economy not hurt it?

We can't raise revenue because history shows that we increase spending? What a lazy argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

mine's sketchy, provide proof. I've done my job to bolster my case.

---

You should take the rest of the day off. You earned it. It can't be easy cramming so much horseflop in.:lol

At the end of the day, your whole case was a bunch of unconnected dots. You mock all of us for not connecting them, but you never connected them yourself.

You just bang on about how Keynes and FDR were demon indwelt.

Quote:

---

deep stuff

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

Not to mention, FDR sacrificed the lives of american soldiers intentionally to draw us into war. FDR is scum.

---

Pearl Harbor?

Quote:

---

Robert Stinnett, in his book Day of Deceit (2001),[8] claims Kimmel was deliberately kept ignorant, at least indirectly on the specific orders of FDR, because the President and others were aware not only of Japan's intent to attack Pearl Harbor, but also of the date and time. Kimmel, Stinnett argues, was given deceptive orders. In fact, Kimmel was denied access to MAGIC for security reasons, and worked poorly with his Army counterpart, General Walter Short, who had responsibility for defending the fleet.[9] Stinnett argues Admiral Kimmel and General Short were scapegoated to cover up deliberately allowing the Japanese to strike in order to arouse American public opinion.

---

This?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Husband_E._Kimmel

Quote:

---

The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor occurred on December 7, 1941. Edwin T. Layton related that during the attack, “Kimmel stood by the window of his office at the submarine base, his jaw set in stony anguish. As he watched the disaster across the harbor unfold with terrible fury, a spent .50 caliber machine gun bullet crashed through the glass. It brushed the admiral before it clanged to the floor. It cut his white jacket and raised a welt on his chest. ‘It would have been merciful had it killed me,’ Kimmel murmured to his communications officer, Commander Maurice ‘Germany’ Curts.”[2][3] In The World at War a naval serviceman, who had been situated alongside Admiral Kimmel during the attack, recalled that as Kimmel watched the destruction of the fleet, he tore off his four star shoulder boards and replaced them with those of a Rear Admiral, in apparent recognition of the impending end of his command of the Pacific Fleet.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iggy

All these policies were instrumental in leading us to be face fucked for a period of 15 yrs.

---

Amity Shlaes?

Guys.... Settle down.

The whole reason the great depression lasted so long, was that politicians did as the always do. Pointed fingers at everyone, and scared the people in how they wanted to use their power.

They made it political. Just like today.

It's Bush's fault.... Still. Just ask any liberal who wants to raise the taxes of employers. No wonder employers are afraid to hire more people.

They don't want to hire more people because people aren't spending.

Taxes were plenty high on corps and citizens and capitalists from '45 to '75, and USA had huge growth in real wealth, widely shared.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

They don't want to hire more people because people aren't spending.

---

There are plenty of places who need more help, like where I work. They are simply working those of us who don't mind working overtime allot. There are several of us in my small division alone working enough overtime to keep five or more people from being hired. Other places are doing the same thing. With the uncertainty of future business costs, they are only hiring people as a last resort.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

Taxes were plenty high on corps and citizens and capitalists from '45 to '75, and USA had huge growth in real wealth, widely shared.

---

Also had higher import tariffs, and our free trade agreements of today didn't exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

There are plenty of places who need more help, like where I work. They are simply working those of us who don't mind working overtime allot. There are several of us in my small division alone working enough overtime to keep five or more people from being hired. Other places are doing the same thing. With the uncertainty of future business costs, they are only hiring people as a last resort.

---

Who is buying part changing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Who is buying part changing?

---

I repair automation equipment. You find automation equipment just about everywhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Just ask any liberal who wants to raise the taxes of employers. No wonder employers are afraid to hire more people.

---

Like they weren't hiring in the Clinton days when the taxes were higher?

Just ask any conservative or liberal how that statement you made is full of shit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

I repair automation equipment. You find automation equipment just about everywhere.

---

Sorry, part changing does not an economy make.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

. What Harding/Coolidge did in the 1920 crash was minimal to no intervention, infact tax cuts and letting interest rates rise got them out of the crash within a year. This had to do with the market reallocating it's resources to more productive sectors and letting the bad sectors fail.

---

You minimize the helpfulness of unions in agreeing to wage flexibility, but that's essentially my understanding too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

FDR had a complicit press and propagandist help with covering up for his failure.

---

The media conspracy goes all the way back, huh?

"the market reallocating it's resources"

the 1929-1932 banking system and wall st were financing the market?

Recently listened to H. W. Brand's Traitor to His Class: The Privileged Life and Radical Presidency of Franklin Delano Roosevelt

Recommended for those who are interested (and you'd have to be at 888 pages and/or one long audiobook).
Just found out that Brand is a professor at UT - Hook 'em!

What stood out for you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

You minimize the helpfulness of unions in agreeing to wage flexibility, but that's essentially my understanding too.
The media conspracy goes all the way back, huh?

---

When ida tarbell who was related to the Sun Oil exec wrote a scathing article against standard oil which led to anti trust. What? is it hard to concieve that there is ideological biases in trades? Does that violate any law of this metaphysical universe?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Sorry, part changing does not an economy make.

---

Okay, maybe you were looking for a Economy Job that symbolizes the whole economy as an example. That's a reasonable expectation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

Okay, maybe you were looking for a Economy Job that symbolizes the whole economy as an example. That's a reasonable expectation.

---

Maybe I wasn't.

Besides, you weren't being addressed.

Hypocrite.