Hoover succeeded Coolidge, using the same economic/monetary playbook. THE DIZZINGLY HEIGHT OF WILLFUL STUPIDITY!!! ineffective/bad economic policies at the end of Coolidge years, followed by the Hoover years, led to the Great Depression. Hoover's trade war deepened it. FDR is often considered one of the greatest U.S. presidents due to his transformative leadership during critical periods in US history. He implemented groundbreaking policies, the Great Deal and credit facililties, etc., during the Great Depression, which reshaped the economy and provided relief to millions. Hoover's average annual GDP growth rate was -9.3%, the worst of all presidents; FDR inherited this mess. FDR launched the New Deal to end the depression, growing the economy at an annual rate ~ 10%, the highest among all POTUS
the intellectual dishonesty facts are under Hoover, the US economy was shrinking every year, declining at a rate of over 10% a year; unemployment had risen from 10% to 25% FDR inherited this economic mess implemented the New Deal programs and other effective economic / monetary policies leading to a growing economy---generating GDP growth at an annual rate of ~>10%---the highest for any POTUS and a reversal the uptrend in unemployment rate, from 25% to below 10% yet, StupidMoniker continues to parrot the convenient false narrative that FDR F'd up everything
It's pretty wild that all of the seemingly gigantic borrowing tied to WWII, the New Deal, the Marshall Plan etc.. still resulted in a lower debt to GDP ratio than what we have today. Also the debt to GDP ratio at the time was quite high because the economy had cratered during the Great Depression and once it recovered, the ratio quickly fell due to rapidly growing GDP and high tax receipts (since they weren't slashing taxes the moment the economy recovered). By 1960, the debt to GDP ratio was cut in half from over 110% to around 55%.
judging by his posts---convenient parroting of false claims about spending---I can only conclude that Moniker is confused and all mixed-up about the US Constitution it seems that you've never read Article I, Section 8, Clause 2 of the US constitution, which addresses Congressional Spending and Borrowing Power. It grants Congress the power to tax and spend money for the general welfare of the United States. you have difficulty understanding Article I, Section 8, Clause 2 of the US Constitution
in addition, the downward-trending GDP / per person reversed to the upside during the FDR years, 1933 1945
I notice all the numbers you are referencing are conveniently from the 1930s, under Hoover, when I specifically said things worked very well in the 1920s, under Coolidge. Why is it that none of your references are to Coolidge and his presidency? Could it be because there is nothing to complain about with regard to Coolidge and his presidency? That, as I said, he saw consistent economic growth while also drastically reducing the debt? Its like you have to argue against a point I never made instead of addressing what I said directly. What's that called again? Somehow they didn't figure out until 1933 that promoting the general welfare meant government handouts, despite ratifying the Constitution in 1789. I guess not only did I not understand the Constitution, the people that actually wrote it didn't understand it either. They seemed to think promoting the general welfare meant doing all the stuff listed after Clause 2 in Article 1 Section 8 (building post roads, establishing courts, making an army and a navy, etc.). It's a good thing FDR came around after 134 years to set them all straight.
more intellectual dishonesty did you not read my comment that his successer Hoover copied his economic playbook. they didn't work, leading to an annual decline in GDP of > 10% for 4 consecutive years, in addition to a ~ 25% unemployment rate btw, i notice that you have shied away from responding to my criticism of this stupid comment from you silence amounts to your agreement that it was stupid
You can keep saying Hoover's policies were Coolidge's, but they were not. Hoover's Economic Policies - Econlib Nope, just have already addressed it hundreds of times. Government spending used to be a miniscule portion of GDP. Then FDR came around and had the New Deal, and ever since we have been in an ever-increasing debt nightmare. The country became a superpower and the world's greatest economy without all of the government spending, so clearly the spending is not necessary to accomplish those goals.
Long Story Short Large Amounts of our Tax Dollars should not find its way into individuals/corporations unless they provide Equal Value to the People You cannot make millions on Private Prisons but feed them birdseed and make them sleep on hay They have contracts on making sure they have 80% capacity When they should have contracts that says their recidivism rate should be less than 50% Rocket River
How could a prison possibly control whether or not someone commits another crime after they leave? The BJS did a study that showed that after 10 years out of prison 82% of prisoners had been arrested again and that they had a 62% chance to be sent back to prison. Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 24 States in 2008: A 10-Year Follow-Up Period (2008–2018) There is just basically a 0% chance of a prison guaranteeing that they have a recidivism rate of less than 50% (unless at least half the prisoners die in the prison, because you cannot commit a new crime after release if you are never released).
Not my problem. If you want Government money you have to EARN IT and that is not being a d*mn baby sitter Instead of lobbying the Government to find new ways to put people into Jail AKA - HAVE AN INCENTIVE TO JAIL PEOPLE then they should have an INCENTIVE TO REHABILITATE PEOPLE Rocket River
it amounts to a non-denial denial. hoover copied his predecessor's economic policies---expecting the same outcome---which eventually cratered the US economy Hoover conveniently assumed that these policies would replicate the roaring 20s; instead they led the US economy into the Great Depression. , conversely, at one time, slavery was generally accepted paving the way to rescue the cratered US economy, which was caused by Hoover, who copied Coolidge's economic playbook
Norway's prison reform took recidivism rate from about 70% in the 90s to about 20% now. https://magazine.ucsf.edu/norways-humane-approach-prisons-can-work-here-too Whether that's replicable in the US is another story. Though as long as the private prison system exists, there is zero chance of reform to even give it a shot.
Do y’all think they’ll actually follow through on their “promise” to hold a vote on the ACA subsidies?
Except that he didn't, which is what the posted article says. Hoover actually thought that the government should be more interventionist, which is why he tried that instead of Coolidge's policies, which is what lengthened the great depression. Slavery didn't work though, the south fell behind the north and then there was a civil war. Low government spending did work, the US went from a largely agrarian colony of the British to the most powerful country with the biggest economy in the world. The only thing they have in common is that both are in the past. Being the only major power not devastated by WWII did quite a bit to help the cratered US economy, which was caused by Hoover, who went away from Coolidge's playbook (which you would know if you read the article, or even just a wikipedia page). The author says that one of the major differences is that "the country does not share the U.S.’s legacy of systemic racism, born of chattel slavery, which has led to disproportionate imprisonment of non-white men." Then it also says, "About two-fifths of those incarcerated in Norway are from Africa, Eastern Europe, and the Middle East." If you look at the Demographics of Norway - Wikipedia you will see that Norway is 80% Norwegian, and African, Eastern European, and Middle Eastern people make up only around 8ish percent of the population. So their prisons actually have a more disproportionate imprisonment of non-white men. It also doesn't mention how many (if any) of these African, Eastern European, and Middle Eastern people who make up a disproportionate number of their criminals are deported, and thus cannot recidivate. I'm not sure how much of a 1 to 1 comparison can be made, and the article is certainly ideologically slanted.
the intellectual dishonest Moniker at the beginning of his presidency, Hoover used his predecessor's playbook, hoping that the roaring 20s would continue. Hoover then imposed tariffs on imports, which only deepened the Depression.
