Everything Should Be Cut In Economic Crisis

It is too late for that form of moral indignation since you have been "soaking" in the moral turpitude of the abomination of hypocrisy since birth, and from some indications, Lord Satan was re-elected to another thousand year term, by a majority of the People who refuse to bear true witness simply for the sake of morals and that form of moral absolutism, especially in modern times.

From my perspective, we should be getting our Tax dollar's worth from our government, by insisting on an FDA label on any drug on any market in our republic.

Supply side economics should be supplying us with better Governance, at lower cost.

 

The Great Depression ended in 1933-34, when the economy stopped contracting and started growing.

There was no depression during the war. There was a sharp recession in 1946-47, based on what you call "austerity" measures. Ditto 1938. As shown by data I previously posted.

 

Most sources claim the Great Depression was ended by the outright Communism of our wartime economy instead of the mere Socialism that FDR wanted to "impose".

 

I believe we should clamor for the general government to establish a better and more faithful relationship with our federal Constitution and supreme law of the land.

 

A depression or recession by definition is when the economy is contracting. In the GD, the economy contracted by an astounding 30% real (40% current $) over three years from 1929-1933. By 1934 the economy was growing and now longer in a depression/recession. The effects of the depression, however, took many years to recover from. It wasn't helped by the fact that the Govt cut spending in 1937 and there was a recession in 1938. By 1942, the economy had pretty much fully recovered.

Year - GDP - % chng - GDP $2005 - % chng - unemployment

1929 103.6 N/A 976.1 N/A 3.3
1930 91.2 -12.0% 892.0 -8.6% 8.9
1931 76.5 -16.1% 834.2 -6.5% 15.9
1932 58.7 -23.3% 725.2 -13.1% 23.6
1933 56.4 -3.9% 715.8 -1.3% 24.9
1934 66.0 17.0% 793.7 10.9% 21.7
1935 73.3 11.1% 864.2 8.9% 20.1
1936 83.8 14.3% 977.0 13.1% 17.0
1937 91.9 9.7% 1,027.1 5.1% 14.3
1938 86.1 -6.3% 991.8 -3.4% 19.0
1939 92.2 7.1% 1,071.9 8.1% 17.2
1940 101.4 10.0% 1,165.9 8.8% 14.6
1941 126.7 25.0% 1,365.0 17.1% 9.9
1942 161.9 27.8% 1,616.8 18.4% 4.7

Sources:
GDP: BEA.gov
Unemployment: http://www.bls.gov/opub/cwc/cm20030124ar03p1.htm

 

Then the stores would become the dealers. The issue isn't the character of the distributor, it's the nature of the good being sold. It's one that coerces consumption by creating physiological and psychological dependence. If there's no such thing as "moderate use", then there's no expectation that every customer the store has is anything more than an addict.

 

There was, but you need to strip out wartime production in order to see it. Contrast the last column with the third:



Consumption by consumers of course, thanks to rationing, was far down, and then jumped after this rationing was lifted, and continued to grow the years after.



Even if we accept your frame of the recession beginning in 1937, this still doesn't end until after the war is over.

 

"October 29, 1929, was a dark day in history. "Black Tuesday" is the day that the stock market crashed, officially setting off the Great Depression. Unemployment skyrocketed--a quarter of the workforce was without jobs by 1933 and many people became homeless. President Herbert Hoover attempted to handle the crisis but he was unable to improve the situation. In 1932, Franklin Delano Roosevelt was elected president and he promised a "New Deal" for the American people. Congress created The Works Progress Administration (WPA) which offered work relief for thousands of people.

The end to the Great Depression came about in 1941 with America's entry into World War II."

Source: http://www.americaslibrary.gov/jb/wwii/jb_wwii_subj.html

 

^ Almost verbatim the same crap I was fed in school.

Yes, so much relief in fact, that they shut it down when it turned into a bureaucratic sh*thole of a mess.

 

"At its peak in 1938, it provided paid jobs for three million unemployed men (and some women), as well as youth in a separate division, the National Youth Administration. Headed by Harry Hopkins, the WPA provided jobs and income to the unemployed during the Great Depression in the United States. Between 1935 and 1943, the WPA provided almost eight million jobs.[3] Full employment, which emerged as a national goal around 1944, was not the WPA goal. It tried to provide one paid job for all families in which the breadwinner suffered long-term unemployment.[4]"

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Works_Progress_Administration

 

Well of course if you strip out military production in the middle of a world war when the entire economy was geared towards producing military equipment GDP would look lower. Why would you want to do that?

 

A different version of what happened.

The Works Progress Administration (renamed in 1939 as the Work Projects Administration; WPA) was the largest and most ambitious New Deal agency, employing millions of unskilled workers to carry out public works projects,[1] including the construction of public buildings and roads. It also employed artists, writers, actors and directors in large arts, drama, media, and literacy projects. Writers documented local and state histories, artists painted murals and other works for new federal post offices and other buildings.[1]

The WPA provided food for children and redistributed food, clothing, and housing. Almost every community in the United States had a new park, bridge or school constructed by the agency. The WPA's initial appropriation in 1935 was for $4.9 billion (about 6.7 percent of the 1935 GDP), and in total it spent $13.4 billion.[2]

At its peak in 1938, it provided paid jobs for three million unemployed men (and some women), as well as youth in a separate division, the National Youth Administration. Headed by Harry Hopkins, the WPA provided jobs and income to the unemployed during the Great Depression in the United States. Between 1935 and 1943, the WPA provided almost eight million jobs.[3] Full employment, which emerged as a national goal around 1944, was not the WPA goal. It tried to provide one paid job for all families in which the breadwinner suffered long-term unemployment.[4]

The WPA was a national program that operated its own projects in cooperation with state and local governments, which provided 10%-30% of the costs. WPA sometimes took over state and local relief programs that had originated in the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) or Federal Emergency Relief Administration (FERA) programs.[5]

Liquidated on June 30, 1943 as a result of low unemployment due to the worker shortage of World War II, the WPA provided millions of Americans with jobs for 8 years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Works_Progress_Administration

In 1943 we no longer need a public program to get people back to work, we had WWII.

 

And then we just get to the "criticism" part, and here's the kicker:

Sorry, don't kid yourself, there were plenty of people for them to employ even with the War going on, what they had was a leadership problem.

But hell, it's wrong to think jobs are the end of the economy. Jobs are themselves a means to an end, this program would have just been a weight around our necks if kept around.

Military production is not real wealth. It has one purpose, to be used up in a War, which by its very definition destroys wealth.

Certain GDP output has more quality than others, wartime GDP output is the lowest.

 

Is there any reason we could not dispense with the Rural Electrification Agency in 2013?

 

Military production can and often does have the stipulation of "No Foriegn", meaning that all materials, labor and services used to service the contract have to come from domestic sources, as opposed to the kind of Tax Dollar outsourcing we saw in the "Stimulus" spending which went to wind turbines from China ( even though there are 6 American manufacturers) or all-electric sports cars from the netherlands.


The base level spending on American production via tax dollars acts as startup funding for production facilities, which once established can be turned to civilian production.


This is how the American Semi-conductor industry got started, and reach a 1970-1990 world market domination. It was only the increases in labor and radical enviromental regulation compliance that pushed that industry overseas in the mid 1980s to 1990s that caused that Military Infrastructure investment to be lost to American Industry.


Now, there is not a single American Manufacturer of Cell Phones, or any other form of comercial electronics. Those were valuable jobs and GDP.


-

 

What "society" are you even talking about!? I don't freaking know you and I don't ever want to know you or associate with you. This "society" you are talking about is nothing more than a collectivist abstraction in your mind and I don't give a flying (*)(*)(*)(*) about what you want me to do. You are always crying about progressives imposing their collectivism on you and you turn right around and use the same mindless rationale to violate state and local sovereignty because, oh, we're all in this together!!! You sound like just another collectivist progressive with wishy-washy fantasy-based views. You go get drunk all night and I will do what I want to do. Mind your business, you busy-body.

 

Then we should put away people who "peddle" booze to people like SM who think it's their RIGHT to get smashed at night clubs.

 

There is no legal reason, in my opinion, why all Drugs should not be required to have an FDA, merely to ensure our federal government is not engaging in corrupt business practices or other forms of moral turpitude and repugnance to our supreme, laws of the land.

Supply side economics is supposed to supply us with better governance at lower cost.

 

In my opinion, the Right would establish more confidence in their sincerity for their allegedly conservative Cause, if they were more willing to clamor for an end to the drug war. How can it be any less of a form of theft, on a generational basis, if even the Right alleges to abhor that form of repugnance to the wisdom Ordained and Established by our Founding Fathers, with its emphasis on Individual Liberty and limited government and specifically enumerated in our supreme law of the land.

 

Well I know for a fact that opium use in the 19th century was an epidemic that forced the effected communities to curtail these "rights" and after prohibition of opium its use declined markedly.

 

Look whether you llike it or not, there are legitimate times when your rights are curtailed for public health and safety concerns. Opiates were prohibited decades in some cases before alcohol ever came onto the radar screen as a target.

Alcohol is not at all morally equivalent to alcohol. Some drugs really are worse than others.

 

Cocaine should still be used in medicine, why can't cancer patients access Cocaine? Marijuana is great, but that is more for treatment of back pain but the more severe illnesses should get the stronger drugs.

 

How well did that work for alcohol? Simply driving it "underground" is no substitute for Commerce, well Regulated among the several States.

 

From my perspective, it is about the privileges and immunities of some consumers of recreational drugs and not others.