Quoted message said:
MorComm <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> FDR's band-aids (CCC, WPA, NRA) only took the unemployed off the
> streets and put them to work making trails and bathrooms in our
> National Parks and Forests.
[censored], you cant get a drop in the unemployment
rate from 25% to 15% with just that.
> At least, they weren't roaming the streets and forming Bonus Armies,
> but that did not solve the Great Depression.
No one said anything about 'solve', what was being discussed
was you completely silly claim that nothing happened till the war.
> Huge public works projects cost real tax money,
Irrelevant to whether they have a big effect on the unemployment rate.
> blowing products up overseas generates surplus value while producing
> jobs in the homeland.
And produces big piles of corpses as well.
> The fact remains that in 1939 US factories were running at 50% capacity
> on 40 hour weeks,
Thats as big a lie as your completely ludicrous
lie that there were 37M out of work in 1937.
> but by 1944 they were at 100% with 80 hour weeks.
Irrelevant to whether the US economy had substantially revived before
the war had even started, largely due to the FDR deficit spending.
> 40% of the weapons used in WWII were manufactured right here in the
> good old US,
Irrelevant to whether the US economy had substantially revived before
the war had even started, largely due to the FDR deficit spending.
> which cost us only about 300,000 dead,
And FDR's deficit spending.didnt cost anything like that many.
> a pitance in comparison to the 9 millions Germans and at least 27 (the
> latest estimates are closer to 40) million Russians who died.
Irrelevant to whether the US economy had substantially revived before
the war had even started, largely due to the FDR deficit spending.
> It might have turned out differently, of course, if the Germans hadn't
> waited until after Stalingrad in February 1943 to fully mobilize
And things might well have turned out very differently if a
different approach had been taken in the initial advance to
the east by germany too. It could very easily have seen russia
taken out of the war as effectively as Poland, France etc was,
reduced to an irrelevant rump with no industrial capacity at
all and no way of supplying them with anything from the west.
> (cf. Goebel's 'Total War' speech) because we were already fulfilling
> airplane contracts with the French during the 'Phoney War' of 1939-40.
Irrelevant to whether the US economy had substantially revived before
the war had even started, largely due to the FDR deficit spending.
> After Dunkirk, the Brits took 'em over, of course. IOWs, we were moving
> toward full mobilization almost 3 years before the Germans finally did
> the same thing.
Irrelevant to whether the US economy had substantially revived before
the war had even started, largely due to the FDR deficit spending.
> As Senior Member of IEEE, Inc., I guess I've come to despise technology
> and innovation. The only thing I care about anymore is gold.
More fool you.
> "Rod Speed" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> news:[email hidden]...
>>
>> MorComm <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>> news:[email hidden]...
>>
>>> FDR's remedies did not work.
>>
>> Corse they did. So did [censored]'s in spades with unemployment.
>>
>> There was a massive drop in the unemployment
>> rate between 33 and 37 in the US, almost halved.
>>
>>> There were still 37 million out of work in 1937.
>>
>> Flagrant lie, try 6.7M
>> http://www.brookesnews.com/050702depression2.html
>>
>>> Six weeks after Lend-Lease was signed
>>> in 1940 the US economy finally came back
>>
>> That had happened long before that.
>>
>>> and surged ahead. True, there was a lot more to Lend-Lease
>>> than those 80,000 six-wheeled trucks; there were 49,500
>>> Sherman tanks, 80,000 fighters and bombers, and who knows
>>> how many LCTs, destroyers and mini-aircraft carriers.
>>
>> No one ever disputed that the war [censored] immense amounts
>> of that hardware against the wall, what was being discussed
>> was whether the US economy only started to recover after
>> the war had started. That is just plain wrong and a lie.
>>
>>> When the Germans and Japanese destroyed all those
>>> weapons, they inadvertently pump-primed the post-war
>>> American consumer society by creating surplus value.
>>
>> Sure, but the US economy had tremendous
>> strength even before the war.
>>
>>> Also, farmers and ranchers, who, at the start of the war,
>>> were on the dole from the Grangers, were rich and fat at
>>> war's end by selling wheat and meat to the armies.
>>
>> Irrelevant to whether the US economy had substantially revived before
>> the war had even started, largely due to the FDR deficit spending.
>>
>>> Read Studs Terkle's The Good War for more annecdotal evidence.
>>> Richard Overy's Why the Allies Won is a better source for hard
>>> statistics.
>>
>> Both completely irrelevant to whether the US economy
>> had substantially revived before the war had even started.
>>
>>> [censored]'s economics ultimately led to killing off the German work
>>> force at the front while importing (and starving to death)
>>> millions of slave laborers from the far reaches of the Reich.
>>
>> Irrelevant to whether the kraut economy had revived
>> substantially before the war had even started, largely
>> due to the same approach, massive deficit spending.
>>
>>> Doesn't sound too much like working double shifts in Bethlehem
>>> Naval Shipyard and partying in wide open San Francisco in 1944?
>>
>> Irrelevant to whether the US economy had substantially revived before
>> the war had even started, largely due to the FDR deficit spending.
>>
>>> And, by the by, no matter what odd ball economic theory you're
>>> peddling on-line,
>>
>> Nothing 'odd ball' about it, yours is the fruit loop
>> claim, nothing to do with economic theory at all.
>>
>>> the US is still not creating enough scientists and engineers.
>>
>> [censored].
>>
>>> Pretty soon the center of Empire is going to move elsewhere
>>
>> Fools like you have been claiming that ever
>> since the Jap economy got going after the war.
>>
>> It remains to be seen if that will actually happen and we have in fact
>> continued to see virtually every example of the full commercialisation
>> of almost all technology happen first in the US and then spread out
>> from there to the rest of the world, almost all of that done by
>> scientists and engineers with technology. And vast amounts of
>> other stuff was fully commercialised in the US first, everything
>> from credit cards to fast food and those stupid shoes etc.
>>
>> No sign of it stopping any time soon with google and ebay the
>> most recent examples of that sort of thing continuing to happen.
>>
>> Have fun listing a single thing that china has done in that regard.
>> Its basically just churning out what has been invented elsewhere.
>> And hasnt produced a single bit of software used world wide either.
>>
>>> no matter how much money this generation of stock
>>> brokers and real estate agents are taking off the top.
>>
>> That happens in any modern first world economy, stupid.
>>
>>
>> Rod Speed <[email hidden]> wrote in
>> message news:[email hidden]...
>>> MorComm <[email hidden]> wrote
>>
>>>> Deficit spending before WWII (WPA, CCC, NRA, etc.) caused the US
>>>> economy to
>>>> stagnate.
>>>
>>> Lie. It was what got the US economy out of the depression.
>>>
>>> Some like england were stupid enough to not go that
>>> route and suffered the consequences of not doing that.
>>>
>>> Even [censored] managed to work out that it worked.
>>>
>>>> Before Lend-Lease in 1940 factories in the US were operating at 50%
>>>> capacity.
>>>
>>> Another lie and there was a hell of a lot more
>>> that mattered than just factorys anyway.
>>>
>>>> The fact is that by blowing up those trucks on the steppes of
>>>> Russia, the
>>>> Germans were allowing us to run the printing presses over here full
>>>> blast.
>>>
>>> Utterly mangled all over again. Those trucks were a very
>>> small part of the total wartime lend lease operation.
>>>
>>>> That's why war is such an attractive option.
>>>
>>> Separate issue entirely to your pig ignorant claim that
>>> the US economy didnt not revive until the war had started.
>>>
>>>> As long as you blow things up "over there", you're not competing
>>>> with the
>>>> private sector "over here."
>>>
>>> Utterly mangled all over again.
>>>
>>>> That's what created the modest surplus in the middle class at the
>>>> end of WWII
>>>> that fired the post-war consumer economy.
>>>
>>> Utterly mangled all over again. And have fun explaining how
>>> come there was a completely different effect after WW1.
>>>
>>>> The 16 million vets who got the GI Bill only made $25 a month
>>>> killing Germans
>>>> and Japanese, but the shipyard and aircraft workers made $5000 bucks
>>>> a year.
>>>
>>> Separate issue entirely to your pig ignorant claim that the
>>> US economy didnt not revive until the war had started.
>>>
>>>> IOWs: War and government planning are what made the US into a great
>>>> power,
>>>> instead of a stagnant backwater.
>>>
>>> Utterly mangled all over again. The US
>>> was that before WW2 even happened.
>>>
>>>> That's what you smug neo-cons never want to admit.
>>>
>>> So stupid that it cant even manage to work out that I'm not
>>> a neo-con, and that I have said countless times in the past
>>> that WW2 benefitted the US economy tremendously.
>>>
>>> Separate issue entirely to your pig ignorant claim that
>>> the US economy didnt not revive until the war had started.
>>>
>>>> I'm conservative, though, in an economic sense and believe that
>>>> going off the
>>>> gold standard was the biggest mistake the US ever made.
>>>
>>> More fool you.
>>>
>>>> That's why the workers and the poor don't have the same kind of
>>>> domestic and
>>>> medical safety net they did in 1965.
>>>
>>> More utterly silly pig ignorant drivel. Have fun
>>> explaining the lack of domestic and medical safety
>>> net that LBJ was obsessed about at that time.
>>>
>>>> That's also the real reason behind hordes of "cheap labor" migrants
>>>> assaulting
>>>> the US borders. In 1965, they couldn't exist here; now, they can
>>>> thrive at the
>>>> bottom.
>>>
>>> More utterly mindless pig ignorant drivel. There
>>> were plenty of cheap labor immigrants in the 60s.
>>>
>>>
>>>> "Rod Speed" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>>>> news:[email hidden]...
>>>>>
>>>>> MorComm <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>>>>> news:[email hidden]...
>>>>>
>>>>>> Better listen to Terry Lomax;
>>>>>
>>>>> No thanks, he's always been completely out of his tree.
>>>>>
>>>>>> he's going to put both of us in body bags (when 'the people' rise
>>>>>> up, etc.
>>>>>> etc.)!
>>>>>
>>>>> How odd that it didnt actually happen like that any time any
>>>>> were stupid enough to try it in north america over centurys.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Rod Speed" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:[email hidden]...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> MorComm <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:[email hidden]...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The only way the US ever got out of the Great Depression was
>>>>>>>> because of
>>>>>>>> the economic "miracle" of WWII
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Wrong. The deficit spending well before WW2 did that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (i.e. running the printing presses while blowing up surplus
>>>>>>>> production in
>>>>>>>> Europe and the Pacific while selling tanks and trucks to the
>>>>>>>> Russians).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That stuff mostly wasnt ever paid for.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In a few years, you're going to be pulling weeds in my backyard
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> eatting dog food out of a bowl on my back porch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm aware that the upper third was never touched by the Great
>>>>>>>> Depression,
>>>>>>>> too.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> More [censored]. Quite a few of those were
>>>>>>> affected, tho not as badly as say the bottom third.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And thats completely irrelevant to your pig ignorant lie that we
>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>> all seeing worse living standards than we had in the 60s anyway.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Money sticks with money, property sticks with property.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just another utterly mindless pig ignorant lie. The property
>>>>>>> ownership level is MUCH higher than its ever been, fool.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's my point:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You have never had a point, just a pig ignorant rave.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> in the U.S. today, you'd better stick with your own social class
>>>>>>>> or suffer
>>>>>>>> the consequences.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> More mindlessly silly rabid raving.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Rod Speed" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:[email hidden]...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> MorComm <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:[email hidden]...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm a multi-millionaire who doesn't drink or use drugs,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But cant manage even the simplest stuff like actually
>>>>>>>>> noticing who still get qualified for the professions.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> which makes it a lot easier for me to see the signs of decline
>>>>>>>>>> in a
>>>>>>>>>> society
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Or its just your silly little fantasy.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> than for some poor little sucker who is obviously still trying
>>>>>>>>>> to "make
>>>>>>>>>> it".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Guess which fool has just got egg all over its silly little
>>>>>>>>> face.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm likely older than you are you fool and
>>>>>>>>> likely live a lot better than you do too.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You have to believe because you don't have any money or
>>>>>>>>>> property (and
>>>>>>>>>> you never will).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Guess which fool has just got egg
>>>>>>>>> all over its silly little face yet again.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Better stick with your own social class
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You have absolutely no idea what
>>>>>>>>> so ever about my social class either.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and go down.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hasnt happened either. My parents were always
>>>>>>>>> very comfortably off living standards wise.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And neither of them needed any GI Bill or equivalent handout
>>>>>>>>> either.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Neither did I to qualify for a profession either.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Rod Speed <[email hidden]> wrote
>>>>>>>>>>> MorComm <[email hidden]> wrote
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I still will bet you a dollar-to-a-donut that for "Joe
>>>>>>>>>>>> Average" the
>>>>>>>>>>>> U.S. peaked as a nation sometime between 1960 and 1965.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Send me that dollar.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> You just can't buy a house today on the GI bill (no money
>>>>>>>>>>>> down, 6
>>>>>>>>>>>> months to the first payment, 0% interest) and watch it go
>>>>>>>>>>>> from $10,000
>>>>>>>>>>>> to $500,000 and retire with a pension, SS, top-level
>>>>>>>>>>>> secondary
>>>>>>>>>>>> insurance coverage, and die at the VA hospital for free.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Joe Average" never qualified for those.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The standard of housing "Joe Average" lives in today
>>>>>>>>>>> is quite a bit higher than in that period you listed.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The level of opportunity for "Joe Average" isn't the same
>>>>>>>>>>>> either:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> [censored]. The unemployment rate is about the same.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuition costs are so high that the son of a worker is never
>>>>>>>>>>>> going to
>>>>>>>>>>>> go Ivy and get his hands on the engines of power and
>>>>>>>>>>>> control.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> More [censored], plenty still will, you watch.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> If you're going to get into the professions today, your dad
>>>>>>>>>>>> better
>>>>>>>>>>>> already be rich.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Complete and utter pig ignorant drivel.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In the new world order, alphas stick with alphas, betas
>>>>>>>>>>>> stick with
>>>>>>>>>>>> betas, and gammas never speak to untouchables.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> My point? You can work and make money now, but it's next to
>>>>>>>>>>>> impossible
>>>>>>>>>>>> to change your social class.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Complete and utter pig ignorant drivel.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It's easier to see the overall decline when you are old
>>>>>>>>>>>> enough not to
>>>>>>>>>>>> have been "Raised Under Reagan" to accept a lower standard
>>>>>>>>>>>> of living
>>>>>>>>>>>> as a God given fact.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There has been now lower standard of
>>>>>>>>>>> living except in the eyes of clowns like you.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Rod Speed" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:[email hidden]...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> MorComm <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:[email hidden]...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The following just confirms a realization that I've come
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recently: The basic fact is that the standard of living in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the U.S.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has been dipping lower and lower since around 1965.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is nothing even remotely resembling anything like a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'fact'
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is in fact complete pig ignorant drivel by
>>>>>>>>>>>>> any sensible neasure of real standard of living.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In spades with the communications technology
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you are using to read these posts.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> More and more wealth is coming into the hands of (and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> controlled by) fewer and fewer individuals.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> More flagrant lies. And that has nothing
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to do with the standard of living anyway.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But what are you going to do?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yawn at your pig ignorant drivel.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fight WWII over again and run the printing presses while
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 50 million
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> die overseas? Dunno!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pathetic, really.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "arminius" <richard [email hidden]> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:[email hidden]...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Tom Joad" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:[email hidden]...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any working class person who voted for Bush should just
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cut right
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chase. Pull down your pants and butter your ass because
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you know
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coming. Social Security is just the first example of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bush screwing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> working class so he can give huge tax cuts to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> millionaires and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> billionaires.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about the credit card bankruptcy bill, which was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> written by
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> credit card companies. Get ready for debtors prisons and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> owing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your soul
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the company store.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You sorry pieces of [censored] who voted for Bush - you just
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> screwed all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> children, their children, and children being born for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the next
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hundred
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> years. You stupid [censored]! What have you done? God help
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ignorants [censored].
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Study:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.natall.com/ National Alliance
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.overthrow.com/ Overthrow
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
