People forget that Grapes of Wrath was 1939.
- Jake If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.
Arise you prisoners of starvation arise ye wretched of the earth it's time to audit the banks
That created a lot of jobs, didn't it? No?
Unlike the US national anthem. Fai de bèn a Bertrand, te lou rendra en cagant
There's a stirring revolutionary accomplishment
No. But the fact that it looks impressive by comparison to the current situation should tell you something.
OOOH! He audited the banks! There's a stirring revolutionary accomplishment if I ever heard one.
The Federal Reserve System was created in 1913 under Woodrow Wilson as a federally chartered collection of private banks with a public purpose--to deal with problems of recurring financial panics, such as that of 1907 by being able to supply "liquidity" in times of financial stress and to control the interest rates and money supply. It failed in its mandated mission in a spectacular fashion from 1929 to the mid-30s. Were Obama's Administration to have been even so bold as was FDR in auditing the banks and closing those in default, creating the FDIC and SEC, etc. or even being seen as making a serious attempt he, and progressive prospects, would be in much better shape.
Obama's problems do not arise mostly from the Progressive Left, who will at least vote for him in preference to most likely opposition candidates. The arise from the revulsion of the independents and the moderate Democrats against the current situation. This revulsion will be seized by the right wing and ridden to victory unless someone more progressive can make a clear and convincing case as to who will do what and grab control of events. As the Dutch said while fighting the Spanish: "It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
Five days later he had the legislation he wanted. But then, FDR was all about action.
He didn't let his Fed Reserve determine policy...back then, the Fed Chief wasn't "independent" (code word for "beholden to monied interests, they understood this back then). It was an exec order which got the US off the gold standard.
On social issues, they almost immediately repealed the bible-thumpers Prohibition laws and got a constitutional amendment to that effect through.
And the aid to rural areas with the farm bill he rammed through was nearly immediate too.
Of course, Obama got elected in the equivalent of 1930, not 1932. But, it will be a measure of his fortitude to see how he responds to the obvious challenges facing him now that the US economic recovery begins to falter and the unemployment rate edges ever upward. Fai de bèn a Bertrand, te lou rendra en cagant
1933, interregnum or first 100 days
March 9. Emergency Banking Act March 20. Economy Act March 31. Civilian Conservation Act April 19. Abandonment of gold standard via RFC May 12. Federal Emergency Relief Act May 12. Agricultural Adjustment Act, inc. Thomas amendment May 12. Emergency Farm Mortgage Act May 18. Tennessee Valley Authority Act May 27. Truth-in-Securities Act, requiring full disclosure in the issue of new securities June 5. Abrogation of the gold clause in public and private contracts June 13. Home Owners' Loan Act June 16. National Inudstrial Recovery Act, inc. $3.3B appropriations for public works program e.g. WPA June 16. Glass-Steagall Banking Act June 16. Railroad Coordination Act
Source: Schlesinger Jr, Arthur M., The Coming of the New Deal. 1958. You might want a copy for reference. Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
citations
One never knows what one could miss, do one? Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
Facts contradict your recollection of fiscal policy ex War Production Board.
whatevs. Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
there's no need for this sort of confrontational crap, Cat. He's not 'shuffling shit' or ignoring your facts, he's having a good faith disagreement with your presentation of them and what they mean. Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes
He's not 'shuffling shit' or ignoring your facts, he's having a good faith disagreement with your presentation of them and what they mean.
If you could stick to the arguments that would be nice.
I'm not seeing any bad faith here. I'm seeing a clash of frames and a marked difference in tactical and perhaps ideological analysis.
