PDA

View Full Version : History Repeating Itself



llotter
11-04-2011, 04:21 PM
http://a5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s320x320/380256_2374669898195_1594004627_2371070_292670019_ n.jpg

cushioncrawler
11-04-2011, 05:43 PM
The GOP iz i think saying the same things in 1934 and 2011.
It didnt work in 1934 and it wont work in 2011.
Alltho in 1934 it woz during the depression, and in 2011 it woz just before the depression.
mac.

Qtec
11-04-2011, 06:10 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Keynesian

British economist John Maynard Keynes argued in General Theory of Employment Interest and Money that lower aggregate expenditures in the economy contributed to a massive decline in income and to employment that was well below the average. In such a situation, the economy reached equilibrium at low levels of economic activity and high unemployment. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Keynes' basic idea was simple: to keep people fully employed, governments have to run deficits when the economy is slowing, as the private sector would not invest enough to keep production at the normal level and bring the economy out of recession.</span><span style="color: #990000">Exactly what you are seeing now.</span> Keynesian economists called on governments during times of economic crisis to pick up the slack by increasing government spending and/or cutting taxes. </div></div>

Taxes have been cut and cut, now the spending has to take place but the GOP don't want that.

Q

Soflasnapper
11-04-2011, 06:21 PM
LWW had this a month or so back, but with the WHOLE cartoon (this is a small section of just one corner).

So, as one wag put it, history doesn't always exactly repeat itself, but it rhymes.

However, this brings up an important point.

Yes, back in the '30s, FDR sponsored and got through Congress a lot of deficit spending federal programs. And the debt increased, but the unemployment was only cut in half, approximately. Still in the 12% range (while down from 25%).

Then, WW II came to pass. Guess what we did then? We deficit spent like there was no tomorrow, borrowing about 50% of what the federal government spent in those days, which was up hugely. So the national debt as a fraction of the gdp reached about 125%.

What happened next was...

A. The government went bust, bankrupt, and dissolved.
B. The Constitution was junked, and an entirely new form of government was put in place.
C. The country was reduced entirely to penury, which lasted until this very day.
D. The country began a long several-decades period of its greatest prosperity of all time, and although the national debt NEVER went down, it shrunk as a percentage of gdp to about 35%.

Your answer, please!

cushioncrawler
11-04-2011, 06:42 PM
I doubt that things in the usofa improoved much in 1937 (no fault of Roosevelt -- it woz Congress).

Strangely old-Keynes didnt beleev 1935-Keynes -- what an idiot.

Nowadays few understand 1935-Keynes. There iz spending and there iz spending. There are deficits and there a deficits. There iz debt and there iz debt.

What iz aktually needed iz non-funded spending.
But krappynomicysts talk of crowding-in and crowding-out. In essence all krappynomicysts agree that nothing kan be dunn for the ekonomy. The only thing that kan possibly work iz to do nothing.

And krappynomicysts are here to ensure that nothing iz dunn. That iz their only purpose.
If not for krappynomicysts then something might be dunn -- and then things would get much worse for much longer.
mac.

cushioncrawler
11-05-2011, 01:33 AM
ITS ALL ABOUT JOBS.
http://i1017.photobucket.com/albums/af294/alundil/Misc%20-%20Postable%20images/Jobs_Tattoo.jpg

cushioncrawler
11-05-2011, 02:03 AM
http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u118/fierceandsassy/organicdepression.jpg

LWW
11-05-2011, 06:39 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What happened next was...

A. The government went bust, bankrupt, and dissolved.

Your answer, please!</div></div>

The fed defaulted on it's debt, confiscated public gold reserves, and installed a soft dictatorship.

LWW
11-05-2011, 06:41 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What happened next was...

B. The Constitution was junked, and an entirely new form of government was put in place.

Your answer, please!</div></div>

The COTUS was ignored, and the SCOTUS intimidated by FDR's threat ... with the aid of a democrook congress ... to add justices to the court until the current court would be completely marginalized.

LWW
11-05-2011, 06:44 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What happened next was...

C. The country was reduced entirely to penury, which lasted until this very day.

Your answer, please!</div></div>

Future generations were raped and robbed to kick the can of inevitability down the road a few generations ... the chickens of which are only now beginning to come home to roost, which of course the left claims is Bush's fault.

LWW
11-05-2011, 06:59 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What happened next was...

D. The country began a long several-decades period of its greatest prosperity of all time, and although the national debt NEVER went down, it shrunk as a percentage of gdp to about 35%.

Your answer, please!</div></div>

False, as usual.

The debt was S269,422,099,173.26 as the end of WWII, and the decommissioning of troops, came about in 1946.

It dropped to $252,770,359,860.33 by 1949. Not much, but a reduction ... sans FDR.

It was 1954 before the 1946 debt level was matched again ... so, in spite of your bleatings to the contrary, the late 40's to early 50's boom was during the last time the budget was in true balance/surplus for any length of time.

To end your historical revisionist reign of deceit ... the FDR regime saw the national debt rise from $22,538,672,560.15 to $269,422,099,173.26.

That represented an increase of over 1,095% ... clearly a modern record.

Before you go "B-B-B-BUT W-W-W-WORLD WAR T-T-T-TWO!!!!" let's review that by the start of WWII the FDR regime had already increased the debt by over 221%. WWII increased it by another 272% ... so WWII really didn't increase much the rate of FDR's debt curve, although it did force him to move the debt towards military expenditure and away from fascist nonsense somewhat.

Anything else I can help you with?

Qtec
11-05-2011, 07:24 AM
LINK?????????????????????

Q

LWW
11-05-2011, 07:37 AM
HERE YOU GO (http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt.htm)

You may now ignore the truth again.

Soflasnapper
11-05-2011, 12:20 PM
I will gladly accept correction when wrong, and agree I overstated the case.

Here's the fix:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> D. The country began a long several-decades period of its greatest prosperity of all time, and although the national debt RARELY went down (doing so in only 5 of 47 = ~ 11% of the years from 1933 to 1980), it shrunk as a percentage of gdp to about 35%.</div></div>

While slightly different from what I first wrote, I judge there is no real difference. Mainly we added to the debt, 8 out of every 9 years over that 47 year time span, never substantially reducing it ever (-4% in '47, -2% in '48, -1% in '51, etc.)

Despite adding to the national debt 89%+ of the years, and as the debt mounted ever upwards, the '50s and '60s were unprecedented prosperity decades. My point, slightly overstated, remains true, as slightly amended.

Unlike your points apart from this correction, which are otherwise grossly incorrect and/or misleading.

[to be continued]

LWW
11-05-2011, 02:47 PM
The prosperity was largely due to the rest of the world's industrial base being destroyed.

While everyone else was catching up ... leftist policy stopped us from advancing the very technology we developed and the rising economies used to take markets away from US industry.

Deficit spending did not bring prosperity, it stopped it from being maintained.

LWW
11-05-2011, 02:48 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Unlike your points apart from this correction, which are otherwise grossly incorrect and/or misleading.

</div></div>

Then correct them.

Soflasnapper
11-05-2011, 06:02 PM
Before you go "B-B-B-BUT W-W-W-WORLD WAR T-T-T-TWO!!!!" let's review that by the start of WWII the FDR regime had already increased the debt by over 221%. WWII increased it by another 272% ... so WWII really didn't increase much the rate of FDR's debt curve

You are quite incompetent at reading figures in charts, by that claim.

Let's review the actual numbers, which do not at all support your statements.

Year.....$ Debt Incr. ...% Debt Incr.

1934...... $4.51 B...... 20%
1935...... $1.65 B........6%
1936...... $5.07 B.......18%
1937...... $2.64 B........8%
1938...... $0.74 B........2%
1939...... $3.27 B........9%
1940...... $2.53 B........6%
1941...... $5.99 B.......14%

This is the listing of increases in debt as measured by the fiscal year ending in June. Adding these percentage increases yields a sum total of well under 100% increase. Because of compounding, the achieved total debt growth was somewhat higher, at 117%. That is, using June 1933's debt figure of $22.538 B, the debt in June 1941 of $48.961 B was 117% higher, over 8 years. Roughly a 117/8 = 14.63% annual average increase (although less because of compounding). Note, although as of June 1941 we were not yet 'at war,' we were actively engaged in violations of the Neutrality Act, supplying war materiel to our eventual allies. Part of that last largish deficit number is likely due to pre-war preparations for war, as its $5.99 B increase of the debt that year was over double the prior year's increase, but I leave all of it in the pre-war spending category.

How about for after the war began?

Year.....$ Debt Incr. ...% Debt Incr.

1942...... $23.46 B.......48%
1943...... $64.27 B.......89%
1944...... $64.3 B........47%
1945...... $57.67 B.......29%
1946...... $10.73 B........4%

Adding THESE percentage increases yields a 217% increase, which again is off, considering compounding. The actual debt went from $48.961 B in June '41 to $269.422 B in June '46, reaching 550% of the pre-war debt so defined, for an increase in the debt of 450%. Naively, this yields an average annual percentage increase of 550/5 = 110% a year (again, in reality, less because of compounding).

So, you've claimed that the pre-war approx. 14.6% annual average increase of the national debt was about the same as the war years' approx. 110% a year annual increase in debt. Only off by a factor of 700%. Should we consider that 'close,' for you?

To take another angle on it, in FDR's first 8 years, the debt increased a total of $26.422 B. The very first budget year we were at war for half the year, it was up nearly as much as in 8 years, at $23.461 B. Then $64 B, $64 B again, and then $57 B.

You may now perhaps begin to see the problem in your claims.

To restate and conclude, as of June '46, the national debt had increased approx. $224.3 B from June '33. Of that, FDR ran up all of $26.42 B for all his alleged wild deficit spending pre-war over 8 budget years, whereas $197.8 B of it was during wartime, in but a 5-year period.