Reply With Quote
Today's left would attack him for being too religious and for being against public employee unions. Want to reconsider?
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?
He would be a hero if he were alive and in his prime today.
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.
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.
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.
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 ins uting price and wage controls.
All these policies were instrumental in leading us to be face ed for a period of 15 yrs. FDR, you all.
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 ing idiot is, but you too are a ing 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"
Nope, and i already awnsered why
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 wads 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 dumb s are a waste of my time.Thanks for proving your a troll for the VRWC.
btw, tell us again how Hoover was solving depression?
"do nothings" = "know nothings
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 roach keynesian suckers 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.
Thanx for the compliment. Read above..
you're all wrong.
No regulation of the 1920s financial sector enabled the capitalists to 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 up the USA and European economies.
You VRWC lying shills are a waste of my time.
Who said anything about Hoover?
Oh, boutons. lol
Oh, You edited. Thanks.
The guy who started the thread. It's his thread. lol
Didn't really see that characterization you cited, though.
I don't have that low an opinion of Hoover tbh.
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 about.
Cool, since nobody was addressing you, your assement wasn't relevant tbh.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
