What do you think of Ron Paul?

[Free Soviets]

Then I should tell you that the turnaround point in the depression was when the New Deal was implemented.

False. The New Deal deepened and lengthened the depression and you fucking know it.

The unemployment rate was already coming down after spiking up after the stock market crash of 1929. The New Fucking Deal, caused it to go up, and it averaged in the double digits throughout the 30s.

this is so wildly at odds with actual history as to be literally insane. you should really stop listening to the liars and morons who are your ideological allies. we can look this shit up.


(the adjusted series counts people employed by the new deal programs as employed, as opposed to the other line)

and, of course, the 1937 recession was caused by a premature round of austerity.

while we're at it, the sooner a country got off the gold standard, the better. and it took until WWII to get the economy fully moving again because the new deal was too small - if your ideas were true then WWII should have caused the total collapse of the economy.

empiricism wins again!

[Wikkiwallana]

I haven't gotten to use this in a while, thanks for the opportunity.

Irrelevant and insulting, but thanks.

I know the title is insulting ad there's nothing I can do to change that, sadly, but the content of the article itself is very explanatory.

Source, as in actually link to it, because I'm calling bullshit

Here are some facts, i assume you don't want the links in french

Anyone can write an essay, I want links to actual historical documentation. The fact that that source called the New Deal socialist and unconstitutional without bothering to explain why isn't helping your case.

Further, I will admit that I am aware of his racist treatment of the Japanese.

Mmm, ideological bias.

Coming from you, man

Coming from me, the person whose primary source of links has been Wikipedia? Get over it.

[New Conglomerate]

Then I should tell you that the turnaround point in the depression was when the New Deal was implemented.

False. The New Deal deepened and lengthened the depression and you fucking know it.

The unemployment rate was already coming down after spiking up after the stock market crash of 1929. The New Fucking Deal, caused it to go up, and it averaged in the double digits throughout the 30s.

What fantasy world is this in?

Oh wait, it's NSG. Sorry, forgot where I was for a second. Carry on.

[Misterfisher minions]

you should really stop listening to the liars and morons who are your ideological allies.

But, but, wait... you are free soviets, you are a socialist or a communist, what should we say about your ideological allies?

[Genivaria]

We all are of course. Anyone who takes an interest in politics has some kind of bias. And I'd rather be slightly biased then be apathetic.

Very honest answer.

Which is why I will never succeed in American politics. I'm too honest.

[Desperate Measures]

I was looking over his policies and feel like I agree with almost half of Ron Paul. Can we cut him in half?

[Free Soviets]

you should really stop listening to the liars and morons who are your ideological allies.

But, but, wait... you are free soviets, you are a socialist or a communist, what should we say about your ideological allies?

well, i suppose you could say tu quoque. but that would be stupid on multiple levels.

[Sibirsky]

False. The New Deal deepened and lengthened the depression and you fucking know it.

The unemployment rate was already coming down after spiking up after the stock market crash of 1929. The New Fucking Deal, caused it to go up, and it averaged in the double digits throughout the 30s.

Pull the other one, it's got bells on.

Not a single fucking thing I said is wrong.

Your New Deal was shit.

[Sibirsky]

And you are not guilty of it?

Yes, but I don't use it as a reason to reject empiricism, unlike the Austrian School.

The Austrian School does not reject empiricism. The Keynesian School rejects reality.

[New Conglomerate]

Your New Deal was shit.

1. Wikki isn't FDR.
2. We were still in a Hooverville economy until the New Deal was begun.

[Sibirsky]

Very honest answer.

Which is why I will never succeed in American politics. I'm too honest.

Lol!

It does take lying to win an election, yes.

[Free Soviets]

Yes, but I don't use it as a reason to reject empiricism, unlike the Austrian School.

The Austrian School does not reject empiricism. The Keynesian School rejects reality.

says the guy who just said that the new deal cause unemployment to increase.

helpful hint: if you find yourself compelled to keep digging when you are in a hole, try to dig up instead.

[Sibirsky]

Well this is interesting.

It's shit.

Yes, government borrowing is immoral. Even if we pretend that taxation is just, and government spending is fine, how the fuck do you justify taxation of the unborn for spending they will not benefit from?

[Occupied Deutschland]

Your New Deal was shit.

1. Wikki isn't FDR.
2. We were still in a Hooverville economy until the New Deal was begun.

Interesting

We were STILL in a "Hooverville" economy even after the New Deal was begun, with the added bonus of food prices being higher because farmers got subsidies for shooting their cattle & burning their wheat fields. What the New Deal, combined with Roosevelt's fabulous speaking, did was make people feel better about how shitty their situation was. It didn't really help the situation.

Edit: Henry Morgenthau, FDRs Treasury Secretary put it best “we have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. . . . I say, after eight years of this administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started . . . and an enormous debt to boot.”"

[Wikkiwallana]

Yes, but I don't use it as a reason to reject empiricism, unlike the Austrian School.

The Austrian School does not reject empiricism. The Keynesian School rejects reality.

Methodology is where Austrian economists differ most significantly from other schools of economic thought. Mainstream schools such as Keynesians and Monetarists adopt empirical, mathematical, and statistical methods, and focus on induction to construct and test theories. Austrian economists reject empirical statistical methods, natural experiments, and constructed experiments as tools applicable to economics, saying that while it is appropriate in the natural sciences where factors can be isolated in laboratory conditions, the actions of humans are too complex for such a treatment because humans are not passive and non-adaptive subjects. As Austrian economist Jeffrey Herbener has noted "there are no statistical characteristics to human behavior. It is purposeful rather than random, and changeable rather than constant".[35] Austrian economists claim one should instead isolate the logical processes of human action. Mises called this discipline "praxeology."[36] The Austrian praxeological method is based on the heavy use of logical deduction from what they assert to be undeniable, self-evident axioms or irrefutable facts about human existence.[37]
According to Austrian economists, deduction is preferred to induction in interpreting economic developments, since if performed correctly, it leads to certain conclusions and inferences that must be true if the underlying assumptions are accurate. Austrian economists hold that induction does not assure certainty like deduction, as real world economic data are inherently ambiguous and subject to a multitude of influences which cannot be separated or quantified, one cause or correlation from another. Austrian economists therefore claim that mainstream economics has no way of verifying cause and effect in real world economic events, since economic data can be correlated to multiple potential chains of causation.[38] Mainstream economists counter that conclusions that can be reached by pure logical deduction are limited and weak.[39] Economists Bryan Caplan and Paul A. Samuelson have noted that such rejections of empirical evidence in economics has led to the Austrian School being dismissed within mainstream economics.[12]

Praxeology is the study of human action. Praxeology rejects the empirical methods of the natural sciences, because the observation of how humans act in simple situations cannot predict how they will act in complex situations. Ludwig von Mises developed his own system of praxeology which is adhered to by many Austrian economists. Mises' praxeology is a fundamental rejection of mathematical methods in economics, seeing the function of economics as investigating the essences rather than the specific quantities of economic phenomena. This was seen as an evolutionary, or "genetic-causal", approach against the alleged "unreality" and internal stresses inherent in the "static" approach of equilibrium and perfect competition, which are the foundations of mainstream Neoclassical economics. This methodology is also driven by the belief that econometrics is inherently misleading in that it creates a fallacious "precision" in economics where there is none. Mises wrote of his economic methodology that "its statements and propositions are not derived from experience... They are not subject to verification or falsification on the ground of experience and facts."[86]

F.A. Hayek wrote that any theories in the social sciences can "never be verified or falsified by reference to facts."[14][15]

Emphasis mine.

[Wikkiwallana]

Well this is interesting.

It's shit.

Yes, government borrowing is immoral. Even if we pretend that taxation is just, and government spending is fine, how the fuck do you justify taxation of the unborn for spending they will not benefit from?

I'd have to see it achieved before I'd bother to decide if it was justifiable or not.

[Sibirsky]

False. The New Deal deepened and lengthened the depression and you fucking know it.

The unemployment rate was already coming down after spiking up after the stock market crash of 1929. The New Fucking Deal, caused it to go up, and it averaged in the double digits throughout the 30s.

this is so wildly at odds with actual history as to be literally insane. you should really stop listening to the liars and morons who are your ideological allies. we can look this shit up.


(the adjusted series counts people employed by the new deal programs as employed, as opposed to the other line)

and, of course, the 1937 recession was caused by a premature round of austerity.

while we're at it, the sooner a country got off the gold standard, the better. and it took until WWII to get the economy fully moving again because the new deal was too small - if your ideas were true then WWII should have caused the total collapse of the economy.

empiricism wins again!

So, double digit unemployment rates are good?

The 1937 austerity measures also including massive tax hikes. How fucking convenient of you to leave that shit out of your argument.

[Sibirsky]

Your New Deal was shit.

1. Wikki isn't FDR.
2. We were still in a Hooverville economy until the New Deal was begun.

1. I realize that. He's got a hard on for the New Deal though.
2. Hoover started New Deal type programs. FDR extended and expanded them. And gave them that name.

[Wikkiwallana]

this is so wildly at odds with actual history as to be literally insane. you should really stop listening to the liars and morons who are your ideological allies. we can look this shit up.


(the adjusted series counts people employed by the new deal programs as employed, as opposed to the other line)

and, of course, the 1937 recession was caused by a premature round of austerity.

while we're at it, the sooner a country got off the gold standard, the better. and it took until WWII to get the economy fully moving again because the new deal was too small - if your ideas were true then WWII should have caused the total collapse of the economy.

empiricism wins again!

So, double digit unemployment rates are good?

Were they just supposed to teleport down to normal levels?

The 1937 austerity measures also including massive tax hikes. How fucking convenient of you to leave that shit out of your argument.

Um, that is a standard part of average austerity measures, he didn't leave it out. It's assumed.

[Sibirsky]

It's shit.

Yes, government borrowing is immoral. Even if we pretend that taxation is just, and government spending is fine, how the fuck do you justify taxation of the unborn for spending they will not benefit from?

I'd have to see it achieved before I'd bother to decide if it was justifiable or not.

What?

It is not justifiable. Even if the rule of the majority over the few is justifiable. Even if taxation and government spending is justifiable.

You are stealing from the unborn.

[Sibirsky]

So, double digit unemployment rates are good?

Were they just supposed to teleport down to normal levels?

The 1937 austerity measures also including massive tax hikes. How fucking convenient of you to leave that shit out of your argument.

Um, that is a standard part of average austerity measures, he didn't leave it out. It's assumed.

Bull fucking shit. He intentionally left it out.

[Sibirsky]

1. Wikki isn't FDR.
2. We were still in a Hooverville economy until the New Deal was begun.

Interesting

We were STILL in a "Hooverville" economy even after the New Deal was begun, with the added bonus of food prices being higher because farmers got subsidies for shooting their cattle & burning their wheat fields. What the New Deal, combined with Roosevelt's fabulous speaking, did was make people feel better about how shitty their situation was. It didn't really help the situation.

Edit: Henry Morgenthau, FDRs Treasury Secretary put it best “we have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. . . . I say, after eight years of this administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started . . . and an enormous debt to boot.”"

That was sexy.

The Australian charts that is.

[Free Soviets]

this is so wildly at odds with actual history as to be literally insane. you should really stop listening to the liars and morons who are your ideological allies. we can look this shit up.

(Image)
(the adjusted series counts people employed by the new deal programs as employed, as opposed to the other line)

and, of course, the 1937 recession was caused by a premature round of austerity.

while we're at it, the sooner a country got off the gold standard, the better. and it took until WWII to get the economy fully moving again because the new deal was too small - if your ideas were true then WWII should have caused the total collapse of the economy.

empiricism wins again!

So, double digit unemployment rates are good?

of course not. but remember way back when, where you said that "the New Fucking Deal, caused [unemployment] to go up"? that was what, like 1 post ago? yeah, that's retarded. its good of you to no longer be claiming that, but acting as if you have relevant things to say is sort of laughable after that.

The 1937 austerity measures also including massive tax hikes.

yeah, and? i don't think tax increases will improve the economy. i do think that we have to get them jacked back up to improve equality and efficiency. but if we do so now (and we should), it must be coupled with even more massive direct spending.

[Wikkiwallana]

1. Wikki isn't FDR.
2. We were still in a Hooverville economy until the New Deal was begun.

1. I realize that. He's got a hard on for the New Deal though.
2. Hoover started New Deal type programs. FDR extended and expanded them. And gave them that name.

Calls for greater government assistance increased as the U.S. economy continued to decline. Hoover rejected direct federal relief payments to individuals, as he believed that a dole would be addictive, and reduce the incentive to work. He was also a firm believer in balanced budgets, and was unwilling to run a budget deficit to fund welfare programs.[43] However, Hoover did pursue many policies in an attempt to pull the country out of depression. In 1929, Hoover authorized the Mexican Repatriation program to combat rampant unemployment, reduce the burden on municipal aid services, and remove people seen as usurpers of American jobs. The program was largely a forced migration of approximately 500,000 Mexicans and Mexican Americans to Mexico, and continued until 1937. In June 1930, over the objection of many economists, Congress approved and Hoover signed into law the Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act. The legislation raised tariffs on thousands of imported items. The intent of the Act was to encourage the purchase of American-made products by increasing the cost of imported goods, while raising revenue for the federal government and protecting farmers. However, economic depression now spread through much of the world, and other nations increased tariffs on American-made goods in retaliation, reducing international trade, and worsening the Depression.[44]
…
To pay for these and other government programs and to make up for revenue lost due to the Depression, Hoover agreed to roll back previous tax cuts his Administration had effected on upper incomes. In one of the largest tax increases in American history, the Revenue Act of 1932 raised income tax on the highest incomes from 25% to 63%. The estate tax was doubled and corporate taxes were raised by almost 15%. Also, a "check tax" was included that placed a 2-cent tax (over 30 cents in today's dollars) on all bank checks. Economists William D. Lastrapes and George Selgin,[52] conclude that the check tax was "an important contributing factor to that period's severe monetary contraction." Hoover also encouraged Congress to investigate the New York Stock Exchange, and this pressure resulted in various reforms.

While there were a few New Deal like things in the last year or so of his presidency, the majority of his actions were counter to the ideas of Keynesian economics and FDR's New Deal.

Edit: fixed tag

[Wikkiwallana]

I'd have to see it achieved before I'd bother to decide if it was justifiable or not.

What?

It is not justifiable. Even if the rule of the majority over the few is justifiable. Even if taxation and government spending is justifiable.

You are stealing from the unborn.

Stealing from the unborn probably isn't justifiable, but I have yet to see it being done, seeing as how it would require magic or a time machine.