FDR, the New Deal and the Recession
Every week in the Volante, Hittle or Carr continually claim that
Democrats want nothing less than a socialist state and they point to no
other man than the great FDR as the man who pulled the trigger, so when
I read the opening line of this article I knew I was going to talk
about:
In the 1930s, Franklin Delano Roosevelt saved American capitalism from
its own self-inflicted wounds by erecting a new financial
infrastructure—often over the vociferous opposition of the bankers and
investors whose poor judgment had helped precipitate the Great
Depression.
How did the "socialist" do it?
During the New Deal, the government reacted to a disastrous systemic
failure by creating the sort of backstops, insurance, and
risk-spreading mechanisms the market had failed to develop on its own,
such as deposit insurance, federal securities registration, and
federally sponsored entities that would insure mortgages.
I know. Shocking right? Good thing we elected a Republican President to fix this mess...oh wait...maybe not. Actually, I will give credit to President Bush for doing the right...err...left thing:
But as the nation once again confronts a systemic failure in housing
and housing-related credit, the Bush administration is going back to
the future, using New Deal-era agencies as the cornerstone of its
response.Although the Tennessee Valley Authority has yet to
pitch in, four 70-year-old agencies are helping to cushion the blow of
the housing bust.
Those agencies are Federal Home Loan Bank, Federal Housing Authority, Federal National Mortgage Association, and the FDIC. All of these of course use the strength of the government against the vulnerabilities of the market to provide stability. If someone knows why this is a bad thing, they may want to explain it to Mr. Bush.
I did a little more research on the New Deal. Did it work? Yes:
But if the New Deal did not end the Great Depression, was it doing some good? Historical Statistics of the United States
says yes: Except in the 1937-38 recession, unemployment fell every year
of the New Deal. Also, real GDP grew at an annual rate of around 9
percent during Roosevelt's first term and, after the 1937-38 dip,
around 11 percent.
So on the numbers, the U.S. economy improved
briskly during the New Deal. Things that are moving quickly and in the
right direction, but still haven't reached their destination after a
while, are things that have a long way to go—which is true of the U.S.
economy recovering from 1932. Historians disagree on which part of the
New Deal most encouraged economic growth, but at the least the New Deal
did not prevent this recovery.
Alright, enough talk about the past. We need to look to the future.
So the gist of that article is:
"Historians disagree on which part of the
New Deal most encouraged economic growth, but at the least the New Deal
did not prevent this recovery"
That's saying "It didn't help, but it didn't hurt." So why was it so good?
Posted by Matt Hittle on March 25, 2008 at 10:12 PM CDT #
You are reading it wrong. It says they disagree which part specifically helped but that none of it hurt.
Posted by RCDEM on March 25, 2008 at 10:58 PM CDT #
Posted by Matt Hittle on March 25, 2008 at 11:12 PM CDT #
Posted by GreatBrittany on March 27, 2008 at 12:53 AM CDT #
Posted by Ben on April 11, 2008 at 10:43 AM CDT #