Could someone evaluate this claim?

[TubbaBlubba]

Roosevelt continued Hoover's socialist politics, which caused [the great depression] and made the economy worse. The economy had a temporary upswing due to the war, but did not recover until Eisenhower. If Coolidge's economic policies had been continued, there would never had been a depression.

This person claims a lot of kooky things, he's a vague acquaintance of mine, the vast majority of them appear to be cut-and-pasted from whatever website he read last. This happened to be his prime argument for why FDR was one of the top-5 worst presidents in the last century or so.

But I'm a bit curious about this. Is it complete nonsense? I'm not keen enough on pre-Roosevelt US history to evaluate it properly (and looking up and compiling the relevant info by myself, being fairly ignorant as I am, would take hours). And, I've been meaning to look into the fine works New Deal and Great Depression lately. But decent resources are so, so hard to find with the partisanship...

Anyway, any relevant information is appreciated.

[A Laughing Baby]

This person claims a lot of kooky things, he's a vague acquaintance of mine, the vast majority of them appear to be cut-and-pasted from whatever website he read last. This happened to be his prime argument for why FDR was one of the top-5 worst presidents in the last century or so.

But I'm a bit curious about this. Is it complete nonsense? I'm not keen enough on pre-Roosevelt US history to evaluate it properly (and looking up and compiling the relevant info by myself, being fairly ignorant as I am, would take hours). And, I've been meaning to look into the fine works New Deal and Great Depression lately. But decent resources are so, so hard to find with the partisanship...

Anyway, any relevant information is appreciated.

Strangely, I just replied to almost this exact claim from BAC in another thread with the following:

Yeah, the unemployment rate really suffered under FDR.

http://i.imgur.com/Rp37Z.gif

And wages clearly fell, as well.

http://i.imgur.com/RP0Gl.gif

And just look at how bad GDP performed!

http://i.imgur.com/Wv1yx.png

What a disaster for the nation. Truly a blemish in our history.

[Spindrift]

I was going to ask, "What happened in September 1939?" Then I remembered Adolf's little excursion to the east.

[Loss Leader]

So, this individual dismisses the capital-forming effects of a world war in order to link two Republican Presidents together?

It hardly even makes sense to compare the prewar and postwar economy - technical innovation, demographic shifts, desegregation, and the entry of women into the workforce make 1950 and 1930 two completely different worlds.

[drkitten]

Anyway, any relevant information is appreciated.

The argument is horse manure. The economy got better as soon as the New Deal came into force, got worse again when the Republicans forced the scaling back of the New Deal in 1937, and the idea that Roosevelt continued "Hoover's socialist policies" is too ludicrous to discuss in detail.

[Loss Leader]

After the war, there was a `little depression`in the late 40s. It did abate just about the time Eisenhower took office. However, the causes of the Great Depression and of the postwar depression were so extremely different that it is silly to try to connect one with the other.

[Beerina]

This person claims a lot of kooky things, he's a vague acquaintance of mine, the vast majority of them appear to be cut-and-pasted from whatever website he read last. This happened to be his prime argument for why FDR was one of the top-5 worst presidents in the last century or so.

But I'm a bit curious about this. Is it complete nonsense? I'm not keen enough on pre-Roosevelt US history to evaluate it properly (and looking up and compiling the relevant info by myself, being fairly ignorant as I am, would take hours). And, I've been meaning to look into the fine works New Deal and Great Depression lately. But decent resources are so, so hard to find with the partisanship...

Anyway, any relevant information is appreciated.

The theory is that ratcheting up the taxes on the rich made the likelihood of success of business endeavors smaller, leading to less business risk-taking, dragging out the recovery years longer than it would otherwise take.

[TubbaBlubba]

The theory is that ratcheting up the taxes on the rich made the likelihood of success of business endeavors smaller, leading to less business risk-taking, dragging out the recovery years longer than it would otherwise take.

And what would the "non-dragged out" solution be?

[leftysergeant]

The theory is that ratcheting up the taxes on the rich made the likelihood of success of business endeavors smaller, leading to less business risk-taking, dragging out the recovery years longer than it would otherwise take.:dl:

That dip in 1938 was after Roosevelt agreed to lower taxes in the face of all the whining and wailing of the idiots who believed that the free market could correct itself and that the New Deal was not working.