Another New Record.....

[trapdoor]

We still have idjits who think FDR "prolonged" the Depression with stimulative spending (he actually did prolong it - but only when he cut spending in 1937 causing a double dip).

Yes, that's the Keynesian view of the matter. It has little or nothing to do with history, but it's one of those statements that sounds good. The truth is, the second dip in 1937 was, at the time, called the "Roosevelt Recession." The truth is, the economy was still bad, but showing some signs of improvement. Unemployment, which was 25 percent at the peak of the Depression had dropped to about 15 percent. In 1937, it took a sudden jump to about 19 percent.

Roosevelt's response was not to restore the government spending that had been cut, as any such restoration would have been as useless in ending the recession as it had been in ending the Depression. What he did was restore partical funding to the WPA (no real measurable effect), restore partial funding to PWA (again, no immediate effect), and saliently, go very public with big anti-trust moves at the DoJ. Even with these efforts, unemployment didn't go back to early 1937 levels until the outbreak of WWII.

FACTS MATTER.

 

[gabriel]

well that explains a whole lot! lol. i expect you have as much or more fun making the arguement than you do convincing the opponent!! lol

My father was a very very succesful trial Atty. I grew up learning to argue in that sort of forum...

 

[gabriel]

and it is even more refreshing to hear you say that!! you are to be congratulated zam. if more guys were like that, i could ALMOST be persuaded that debate was a worthwhile pastime!! lol

I have to give credit where credit is due. Your arguments are sound and logical, and your sources are credible. It's a refreshing change from what is often the case in this forum.

I am not entirely convinced that job loss accounts for all of the statistical anomaly with regards to the disability numbers, but i am willing to concede that may account for part of it. Mr. Payne's assertions (see above post) may also account for part of the rise, and I would hope this would be investigated further.Doing less would be a disservice to both the taxpayers and those who legitimately qualify as disabled.

 

[degsme]

Yes, that's the Keynesian view of the matter. It has little or nothing to do with history, but it's one of those statements that sounds good. The truth is, the second dip in 1937 was, at the time, called the "Roosevelt Recession." The truth is, the economy was still bad, but showing some signs of improvement. Unemployment, which was 25 percent at the peak of the Depression had dropped to about 15 percent. In 1937, it took a sudden jump to about 19 percent.

Roosevelt's response was not to restore the government spending that had been cut, as any such restoration would have been as useless in ending the recession as it had been in ending the Depression. What he did was restore partical funding to the WPA (no real measurable effect), restore partial funding to PWA (again, no immediate effect), and saliently, go very public with big anti-trust moves at the DoJ. Even with these efforts, unemployment didn't go back to early 1937 levels until the outbreak of WWII.

FACTS MATTER.

yes Trap Facts matter. And you are correct, FDR did NOT restore Keynesian stimulus in 37, 38 and 39. But the SPENDING from 39 Onwars for WWII... ie KEYNESIAN STIMULUS DURING A DEMAND TRAP.... is what ended the "Roosevelt Recession"....

Thank you for making my point.

 

[degsme]

well that explains a whole lot! lol. i expect you have as much or more fun making the arguement than you do convincing the opponent!! lol

My experience is that you can rarely if ever, "convince the opponent" of anything in the immediate moment. But by showing them the inconsistency of their logic, you can drive them to try and improve their arguement for The NExt Time.

And that invariably means they seek more information, and if your positiion is factually solid, it moves them in your direction.

Furthermore the others reading passively can be persuaded by the stronger factual case.


Its the long game.

 

[gabriel]

hopefully satire and ridicule can do much the same. i have always enjoyed the editorial cartoon more than the editorials themselves.

 

[degsme]

Satire and ridicule tends not to have the effect. Because it doesn't challenge the factual basis of their beliefs as much. They can just respond with satire and ridicule in response. JackDallas is the prima facia example of this.

 

[trapdoor]

yes Trap Facts matter. And you are correct, FDR did NOT restore Keynesian stimulus in 37, 38 and 39. But the SPENDING from 39 Onwars for WWII... ie KEYNESIAN STIMULUS DURING A DEMAND TRAP.... is what ended the "Roosevelt Recession"....

Thank you for making my point.

Can't have it both ways -- according to you, military spending damages the economy. And "from 39 on" indicates the actual Keynesian moves (the restored funding for WPA and PWA) did not, in fact, work. (Which is the reason your initial statement is wrong. Cutting the programs hadn't caused the recession, and partially restoring them had no sigificant effect on it.)

 

[degsme]

Can't have it both ways -- according to you, military spending damages the economy. And "from 39 on" indicates the actual Keynesian moves (the restored funding for WPA and PWA) did not, in fact, work. (Which is the reason your initial statement is wrong. Cutting the programs hadn't caused the recession, and partially restoring them had no sigificant effect on it.)

We've had this discussion. Defense spending IS THE LEAST EFFICIENT WAY FOR GOVERNMENT TO SPEND.... which means that when compared to social service or infrastructure spending, it HARMS the economy. But it still is stimulative spending.

Yes I can have it both ways - because it isn't "both ways"... rather you are trying to make an invalid comparison (ie between better and worse stimulus spending, vs. stimulus and no stimulus spending).

Secondly, the WPA and PWA programs DID WORK. The GDP chart shows a resumption of the same growth rate simply delayed by 18 mos. S

o in the case of 1937, the harm was started in 37 and by mid 1938 the economy had recovered to pre-recession growth rates.... IOW restoring WPA and PWA funding WORKED

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gdp20-40.jpg


FACTS MATTER

 

[trapdoor]

We've had this discussion. Defense spending IS THE LEAST EFFICIENT WAY FOR GOVERNMENT TO SPEND.... which means that when compared to social service or infrastructure spending, it HARMS the economy. But it still is stimulative spending.

Except that the statement isn't true. As long as it is purchasing something off the economy, a dollar is a dollar. It's a dollar spent on a bolt for a tank just as much as it's a dollar spent for a bolt in a bridge's superstructure. If your statements (elsewhere) that the fiscal multiplier for military spending is .5, it would mean that each dollar spent withdraws 50 cents from the economy and is hence bad for the economy and non-stimulative.

Secondly, the WPA and PWA programs DID WORK. The GDP chart shows a resumption of the same growth rate simply delayed by 18 mos. S

"Delayed" by 18 months means "didn't work." It took military spending, and the reduction in manpower caused by taking a few million men out of the job market, to restore pay to the levels it had been before the recession. That's a fact -- and facts matter or so I've been told.

 

[DefeatObama]

two ivy league degrees and a career agitating the community .... who said he wouldn't transform America?

 

[Lukey]

Via Investors Business Daily:



A record 5.4 million workers and their dependents have signed up to collect federal disability checks since President Obama took office, according to the latest official government data, as discouraged workers increasingly give up looking for jobs and take advantage of the federal program.

This is straining already-stretched government finances while posing a long-term economic threat by creating an ever-growing pool of permanently dependent working-age Americans.

Since the recession ended in June 2009, the number of new enrollees to Social Security's disability insurance program is twice the job growth figure. (See nearby chart.) In just the first four months of this year, 539,000 joined the disability rolls and more than 725,000 put in applications.

As a result, by April there were a total of 10.8 million people on disability, according to Social Security Administration data released this week. Even after accounting for all those who've left the program — about 700,000 drop out each year, mainly because they hit retirement age or died — that's up 53% from a decade ago.




Complete text: http://news.investors.com/article/608418/201204200802/ssdi-disability-rolls-skyrocket-under-obama.htm?p=full

LOL! That exceeds his "job creation" number!!!

 

[degsme]

LOL! That exceeds his "job creation" number!!!

And that surprises you when an administration inherits an economy collapsing at the rate of 4 years of GDP growth in 9 mos and 820,000 jobs lost/mo?


Of is your expectation of Obama that of a "Walk On Water Saviour" who despite facing such an accellerated down turn can through his/her sheer spiritual goodness instantly stop such a slide and turn it into normal economic job growth? Particularly in face of a Just Say No Filibustering GOP Senate?