[eastbay]

These two distinguished UCLA professors allege in a new study that FDR and his policies were responsible for much of the suffering during the Great Depression.

Fascinating quick read. There might be a lesson here for us as we creep into this economic meltdown.

Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years.

"Why the Great Depression lasted so long has always been a great mystery, and because we never really knew the reason, we have always worried whether we would have another 10- to 15-year economic slump," said Ohanian, vice chair of UCLA's Department of Economics. "We found that a relapse isn't likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies."

[TreeFarmer]

This is not all that new, people (economists) have been saying for years that FDR et. al. made all the wrong moves during the depression. The only thing that could be "new" is a better understanding of why they were the wrong moves.

FDR is (was) the worst president in the history of the country. He taught people how to raid the public treasury for thier own benefit. Now look at what happens today, a person can't get elected (or especially re-elected) if they don't excel at "bringing home the bacon", bacon that never should have gone to Washington in the first place.

TF

[Loki]

FDR didn't invent pork. Give me a break.

But you're right that he's been blamed for prolonging the Depression by economists for decades. But economists are on the same basic level as psychics and Tarot card readers. So honestly, who gives two shiites what they say?

That said, I think the numbers speak for themselves. The New Deal did not solve the Depression. World War II did. But it may very well have ameliorated it. Certainly the men who got work because of the New Deal had a lot of regard for FDR.

[nobodypanic]

this is my favorite part:

"The fact that the Depression dragged on for years convinced generations of economists and policy-makers that capitalism could not be trusted to recover from depressions and that significant government intervention was required to achieve good outcomes," Cole said. "Ironically, our work shows that the recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened."

and yet in the paragraph before...

Recovery came only after the Department of Justice dramatically stepped enforcement of antitrust cases nearly four-fold and organized labor suffered a string of setbacks, the economists found.

the bolded portion sure sounds like government intervention to me.

economists... it's so hard to take them seriously. i am starting to think they're mostly idiots

[eastbay]

this is my favorite part:

"The fact that the Depression dragged on for years convinced generations of economists and policy-makers that capitalism could not be trusted to recover from depressions and that significant government intervention was required to achieve good outcomes," Cole said. "Ironically, our work shows that the recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened."

and yet in the paragraph before...

Recovery came only after the Department of Justice dramatically stepped enforcement of antitrust cases nearly four-fold and organized labor suffered a string of setbacks, the economists found.

the bolded portion sure sounds like government intervention to me.
economists... it's so hard to take them seriously. i am starting to think they're mostly idiots

Yes, economists can never agree, it seems. In this case, the government intervention in the anti-trust cases was merely enforcement of law, not a distribution of money or a costly and major policy change. There is a (cost) difference.

[nobodypanic]

this is my favorite part:

"The fact that the Depression dragged on for years convinced generations of economists and policy-makers that capitalism could not be trusted to recover from depressions and that significant government intervention was required to achieve good outcomes," Cole said. "Ironically, our work shows that the recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened."

and yet in the paragraph before...

Recovery came only after the Department of Justice dramatically stepped enforcement of antitrust cases nearly four-fold and organized labor suffered a string of setbacks, the economists found.

the bolded portion sure sounds like government intervention to me. economists; it's so hard to take them seriously. i am starting to think they're mostly idiots

Yes, economists can never agree, it seems. In this case, the government intervention in the anti-trust cases was merely enforcement of law, not a distribution of money or a costly and major policy change. There is a (cost) difference.

in that case the conclusion of these so-called brilliant men should have been that specific types of intervention were damaging, not that intervention itself was the problem, because any way you cut it, enforcement of anti-trust laws is not exactly a pure hands-off approach.

[Alcassin]

Oh another libertarian work only to disprove history.

I think FDR was elected 4 times because he was the worst president of the US. 30 post-war years of rapid growth was built on the foundation left by FDR administration.

During Long Depression from 1879-1896 US government didn't intervene. During Panic of 1893 also, and it was a real shock when unemployment quadrupled and depression lasted 5 years.

Yeah, yeah, fuzzy talking all the time...

[eastbay]

this is my favorite part:

"The fact that the Depression dragged on for years convinced generations of economists and policy-makers that capitalism could not be trusted to recover from depressions and that significant government intervention was required to achieve good outcomes," Cole said. "Ironically, our work shows that the recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened."

and yet in the paragraph before...

Recovery came only after the Department of Justice dramatically stepped enforcement of antitrust cases nearly four-fold and organized labor suffered a string of setbacks, the economists found.

the bolded portion sure sounds like government intervention to me. economists... it's so hard to take them seriously. i am starting to think they're mostly idiots

Yes, economists can never agree, it seems. In this case, the government intervention in the anti-trust cases was merely enforcement of law, not a distribution of money or a costly and major policy change. There is a (cost) difference.

in that case the conclusion of these so-called brilliant men should have been that specific types of intervention were damaging, not that intervention itself was the problem, because any way you cut it, enforcement of anti-trust laws is not exactly a pure hands-off approach.

It may be mentioned in the recently published study, which I haven't read. Either way, I suggest the path we take now shouldn't necessarily be based (almost) entirely on a knee-jerk distribution of money, but instead a carefully studied response based on the success or failure of past actions. This study may contribute in determining what is and is not a proper response to a catastrophic (capitalist) system failure.

Note: Bear in mind, I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with the authors or with the actions (or inactions) of FDR.

[pinewillow]

FDR was the institution of the new world order... he set it up so that one world system can occur. Traitor.

1. 1933 In Edmond Paris’s book, printed by Ozark Publications, called The ___ Against Europe, it gets into great detail of what they did. It calls it—the last 30 years of war is all attributable to the __ , their massacres of the Serbs and Jews, etc. But Edmond Paris did not understand that the ___ —and this is one of the most important points I want to make about __ —the ____ is in complete control of the international intelligence community: that’s the CIA, the FBI, the KGB, the Israeli Mossad, the German BND, the British SIS. The ___ is in COMPLETE CONTROL of the entire intelligence apparatus—FBI, every bureaucratic agency in this country, all of it; he is in complete control of it. So, whenever he wants to find something out about an individual, they put in the Social Security number, and everything from all of the intelligence apparatus kicks-in and he and his provincials can review everything about that man. Credit cards, you name it, everything that’s attached to __ social security number, which FDR put upon us in 1933 with the help of ___ ; at the time, I believe he was A___ , or maybe it was ____ —but R__ was behind FDR in putting him in office. The couple of things that he did was implement social insecurity, the income tax, and recognizing Joseph Stalin’s bloody ___ USSR government. So, with the giving of us the Social Security number, that is ___ number—and that’s why they want everybody using it for everything: driver’s license, tax return, credit card, everything you do, that number is you and that number is ___ number.

2. Letter from FDR: In a letter to an associate dated November 21, 1933, President Franklin Roosevelt wrote, "The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson." The Council on Foreign Relations and the New World Order

3. Finally and most ILLUMINATING is this fact:
The extraterestrial movement is a false invention of the Illuminaty, it is sold by hollywood ever since HG wells, and sci-fi to open childrens mind to a "terrestrial return" of a beneficial alien who will lead the world into a peaceful new world order (fake of course) Area 51 is developed to make this happen, their technology is just advanced enough to fake this...

February 22, 1944 Franklin D. Roosevelt writes a DOUBLE TOP SECRET memo on White House stationary for "The special committee on non-terrestrial science and technology." Both the title and the content clearly allude to extraterrestrial life, the former using the word "non-terrestrial" and the latter talks about "coming to grips with the reality that our planet is not the only one harboring intelligent life the universe." http://www.majesticdocuments.com/documents/2000.html

he was trying to sell lizards for some time to the high in power...

It will be the key to consolidate world power, all the lies of myatraya and 2012 and iks and anyone else proporting ET life is all fabrication and they are close in contact with the PTB.

much more but yes, FDR was a snake, a charlatain and a traitor in my humble opinion..

[pinewillow]

More easily confirmed data:
1933-1945 Franklin D. Roosevelt, 32nd. President of the United States (D) Confirmed Bricklayer and Illuminati Puppet. (New World Order: The Ancient Plan of Secret Societies, William T. Still, pg. 21) Roosevelt was Initiated: October 11, 1911, Holland Lodge No. 8, New York City. Brother Roosevelt participated in the Raising of his son Elliott (1910-1990) on February 17, 1933, in Architect's Lodge No. 519, also in New York City. He was present, but did not participate in the Degrees when two other sons, James (1907-1991) and Franklin D., Jr. (1914-1988) became Members of their brother Elliott's Lodge, on November 7, 1935. Brother and President Roosevelt was made the first Honorary Grand Master of the Order of DeMolay *significant* on April 13, 1934 at the White House. Governor of New York, 1929-1933. Nelson Stonafeller (bricklayer?) was the power behind this president. Was also a member of the Anti-American organization known as the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR). Died in office April 12, 1945. Roosevelt is responsible for passing the Emergency Banking and Relief Act of 1933. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt so warmly embraced this unconstitutional law. FDR orders use of Great Seal of the U.S. (Luciferian Seeing Eye) on reverse side of the dollar bill. There are 13 families or groups heading up the World Government plan. These families are portrayed as the 13 layers of blocks found on the strange seal on the reverse side of the U.S. $1 bill. The_SLuceferian_Bloodline FDR once said: "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way." FDR stacked the U.S. Supreme Court with judges who would vow to continue his dictatorial powers. Those powers have been assumed by all Presidents since FDR, including the one presently in the White House. Kill Your Television-Charles Duke on 1933 (The Day Our Constitution was stolen ) Vice President Harry S. Truman, 1945 Confirmed Stonelayer. Replaced Roosevelt for a short term, then went on to capture the next election. Note: We have a Stonelayer Vice President put in power before the President dies. Pres. Theodore Roosevelt, who was blood related to both President Martin Van Buren and to Franklin Delano Roosevelt, is on record. President Roosevelt's son, James, wrote a book entitled "A Family Matter" in which he details Roosevelt "bold decision" to share the nuclear technology with the Soviet Union ! ! ! ! Franklin Roosevelt did indeed know in advance of the attack on Pearl Harbor and allowed it to happen in order to enrage Americans into a war they otherwise would have not supported. Pearl Harbor - Mother of All Conspiracies Franklin Roosevelt was related to the following Presidents: Theodore Roosevelt, Grant, Washington, van Buren, and Taft. (Everything is Under Control. Conspiracies, Cults, and Cover-Ups by Robert Anton Wilson pg 39-40)

Dude, wake the hell up. The luceferians have control of all nukes and they do not want it to get into non family hands...
but it will and then it is over....

[thuja]

People have been trying to tear FDR apart since the day he took office.

Before FDR, we had:
No safety nets for the old, the disabled, the unemployed, etc. We had a very unregulated "free market" where wealth was vastly concentrated with the few.

The modern Right imagines a purist fantasy where government does not look after the safety and welfare of its own people. They are mostly fine with roads, military, police, fire, health care for military and disabled, but abhore the idea of "entitelments" created during FDR's time such as social security and the Medicare program created during LBJ's time.

They've had 28 years to dismantle those entitlements (since Reagan) but for some reason they haven't done it. Why? Because they are extremely popular and it would be devastating to the Middle Class and poor if they were dismantled.

Sorry- FDR is one of the most popular presidents for one main reason...he wasn't on the side of the entrenched wealth elites. He actually created programs that benefited the little guy.

[Plantagenet]

I was having this same discussion with the Dude in another topic. Some people believe that Roosevelt's policies produced progressive improvement of the economy through the depression, but that isn't true. A major economic collapse occurred in 1936-37.

Roosevelt had full control of the economy for several years by this time, and the responsibility for the collapse of 1936-37 therefore belongs to Roosevelt.

Roosevelt's policies not only failed to end the depression, they actually produced new episodes of economic collapse.

[Plantagenet]

FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate

...Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years...Cole and Ohanian calculate that NIRA and its aftermath account for 60 percent of the weak recovery. Without [Roosevelt's] policies, they contend that the Depression would have ended in 1936 instead of the year when they believe the slump actually ended: 1943.

---from Eastbay's link in post #1

[mos6507]

Economists, eh? Those guys are really smart, like their grand guru ALAN GREENSPAN. The guy who never saw the housing crash coming and drove the US straight into it by keeping interest rates so low for so long.

[thuja]

There is a strong movement towards revisionism these last few years and a continuing burning desire to tear down FDR.

What makes me laugh is that conservatives are having to adhere to some of the same Keynesian economic practices that FDR introduced in the 30's...namely massive governmental intervention to shore up an ailing economy.

Ah...conservatives love to decry socialism until they meet a real world problem...

[lawnchair]

The real question of FDR's term was not one of economic purity.

What he did was preserve governance.

The whole damned world was in economic depression at the time. And, who was gaining power in those times? In Italy? Germany?

There were a lot of Americans looking longingly at fascism. Including some very high in power who seriously considered a coup. There were also a lot of Americans looking at Soviet-style communism, and from 10000 miles away it looked pretty successful.

We could have had much worse charismatic leaders than FDR.

There were also a *lot* of unemployed and hungry and displaced people. Hoovervilles. The Bonus Army.

That is what FDR faced, not "can we get back to the happy 1920s".

[TheDude]

I was having this same discussion with the Dude in another topic. Some people believe that Roosevelt's policies produced progressive improvement of the economy through the depression, but that isn't true. A major economic collapse occurred in 1936-37.

Some indicators had surpassed 1929 levels by the later half of the decade - GNP for instance. Unemployment remained high through the 30s though. Not an across-the-board success but it was a severe problem.

Roosevelt had full control of the economy for several years by this time, and the responsibility for the collapse of 1936-37 therefore belongs to Roosevelt.

Like the authors perhaps you take a dim view of workers' rights, since this was what business interests complained loudly about at the time as a factor. Since, as lawnchair points out, there was serious talk of revolt or secession at the time, standing up for populist policies was a shrewd move.

That recession only lasted a year or so, too. FDR indulged in a bit of deficit spending to pull things up as well, before engaging in the massive red line that was WWII.

FDR has had a popular rep for solid reasons - who doesn't like workers' rights, universal electrification, the projects brought about by the WPA and the like, and guaranteed retirement funding? Although it's doubtful that'll be guaranteed in 10 years. But few think we'll run out of oil soon, either.

Roosevelt's policies not only failed to end the depression, they actually produced new episodes of economic collapse.

Recession=collapse? Darn doomers. Was FDR responsible for the Wizard of Oz? What really got the world moving again was first the threat and then the reality of war, too.

Was this originally in Out of this World, or did some of the more outre responses send it there?