Forum


Newt Gingrich gets confronted by Occupy Protesters at Press conference. When asked why he won't support FDRs roadmap he states, FDR "didn't end the depression. WWII did."
@SecretVeta wrote
at 9:13 AM, Thursday December 22, 2011 EST
The period from 1933 to 1937 remains the fastest period of peacetime growth in American history. GDP growth averaged approximately 10% per year. You can see the full range of data here. Additionally, Roosevelt's monetary policy was probably more successful than his fiscal stimulus. First, the bank holiday restored the confidence of American savers and investors more so than probably any other action. Banks were closed on March 9, 1933 and began to reopen only after thorough auditing. When the banks opened on March 12, depositors, despite the suspension of gold convertibility, began putting their money back in the banks. Within a week, $1 billion had been put back into the banking system that had fled during the runs on banks prior to Roosevelt's inauguration. On March 15, the New York Stock Exchanged opened for the first time in 10 days and the Dow jumped 15%, which was the largest single day movement in its history. By the end of the month of March, 2/3 of all banks were reopened and $1.5 billion had returned to the banks.


The second major act of monetary policy was the suspension of the gold standard. That action was overwhelmingly supported by financial and consumer markets. On the day the change was announced, the NYSE jumped 15%. Within three months, wholesale prices had risen 45%. This lowered the real cost of borrowing significantly and investment began to flow into the private sector--orders for heavy machinery rose 100%--and into consumer markets--auto sales doubled. Overall industrial production rose 50%. By early 1937, overall industrial production had returned to its 1929 peak. Unemployment, moreover, had been halved from 25% nationally in 1933 (with certain cities and demographic groups even worse off--75% of black women in Detroit were unemployed) to about 12%-14% in early 1937 (Unemployment statistics prior to 1940 are always best guesses as the Bureau of Labor Statistics didn't collect them until then).


In 1937, FDR faced a growing conservative coalition in Congress and had his own misgivings about spending and reduced relief funding which caused a minor recession. Unemployment jumped to around 17%. GDP fell slightly in 1938, but was above its 1937 levels in 1939. Had this small recession not happened, the US may have left the Depression before military spending for WWII began to pick up. As it is, the combination of war production and the draft is what wiped out unemployment by 1942. So the New Deal didn't end the Depression, but it most certainly did not make things worse and was responsible for helping millions of people. There's a reason why FDR was elected four times and the Democrats only lost control of Congress once between 1930 and 1952.


This isn't to say that the fiscal stimulus was entirely unsuccessful or wasn't important though. Indeed, the New Deal basically created the infrastructure that the modern United States thrived on in the post-War period. The political philosophy of public works was crowned by the Eisenhower Interstate Highway System, which was a direct outgrowth of the New Deal state.
Between 1933 and 1935, the Roosevelt administration spent the equivalent of $1.83 TRILLION on just two public works programs, employing about 15.5 million people directly (not counting indirect employment estimates) over the course of 1933 to 1943. I recently read a really great book which put all of the relevant statistics for the two major New Deal "stimulus packages" (they didn't use that term at the time) into a really well researched history of New Deal public works: Building New Deal Liberalism: The Political Economy of Public Works, 1933-1956, by Jason Scott Smith. This is about as concise a summary of what the New Deal built as you can get.


-From 1933 to 1939, the federal spending on construction rose 1650% over the previous four years (1925-1929).
The Public Works Administration was created in Title II of the National Industrial Recovery Act in 1933. It had an initial appropriation of $3.3 billion- equivalent to 165% of federal revenue in 1933 or 5.9% of GDP.

-US GDP in 1933 was $56.4 billion. With U.S. GDP currently around $14.5 trillion, the 2010 equivalent of a PWA would involve a stimulus package of about $857 billion composed only of direct outlays, no tax cuts or tax incentives.

-To put that $857 billion in perspective, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act provided $275 billion for federal contracts, grants, and loans.

-The PWA completed projects in 3,068 of 3,071 counties in the United States and funded the beginning of other major parts of the New Deal like the Tennessee Valley Authority and the Civilian Conservation Corps.

-The PWA was responsible for a myriad of major hydroelectric projects in addition to the TVA. On the non-federal level, PWA funds built or modernized the Hetch Hetchy and Imperial hydroelectric projects in California, the Santee-Cooper project in South Carolina, the Grand River Dam in Oklahoma, the Lower Colorado River Authority. At the federal level, the PWA was responsible for the Shasta Dam, the Fort Peck Damn, the Bonneville Dam, the Grand Coulee Dam, and finishing the Hoover Dam.

-By July 1936, the PWA had built or modernized one or more schools in 47% of all counties. The PWA completed 7,488 school.

-From 1933 to 1940, the PWA was responsible for 80% of all sewer construction in the United States, completing 1,527 projects. The PWA was also responsible for 37% of all new waterworks in 1934, 50% in 1935, 77% in 1936, and 37% in 1937 for a total of 2,419 projects.

-Over the same period of time the PWA built 822 hospitals, asylums, and sanitariums.

-The PWA also built or modernized 388 bridges or viaducts. Among those built by the PWA was the Triborough Bridge in NYC. The PWA also built NYC's Lincoln Tunnel and the Williamsburg Houses.

-The PWA completed 4,287 public buildings projects, including 295 courthouses and 342 airports.

-Other notable PWA projects include the aircraft carrier USS Yorktown and Fort Knox.

-By March, 1939, the PWA had completed 34,448 projects on the federal, state, county, and municipal levels.

-Total PWA employment was about 7 million over the course of 1934 to 1939, averaging 1.17 million per year.


Now all of this is very impressive. And here's where I tell you that it was the smaller of the two major New Deal construction programs.

-Congress passed the Emergency Relief Appropriation Act in 1935 and FDR created the Works Progress Administration to administer the funds.

-The initial appropriation for the WPA was $4.88 billion- equivalent to 135% of federal revenue in 1935 or 6.7% of GDP (keep in mind that GDP grew approximately 30% from 1933 to 1935).

-The 2011 equivalent of a WPA appropriation would be approximately $973 billion in direct outlays.

-The WPA built 78,000 new bridges and viaducts and modernized 46,000 others. The WPA also built 1,000 new tunnels.

-The WPA built 6,000 brand new schools, constructed additions at 2,170 others, and modernized 31,000 more.

-The WPA was also responsible for building 1,000 public libraries and 225 public hospitals.

-The WPA also built 9,300 auditoriums and gymnasiums and improved 5,800 others.

-WPA projects also included 226 new hospitals and 156 improved ones.

-Office space was also expanded as WPA workers built 6,400 office buildings.

-Other buildings included 7,000 dormitories, 6,000 warehouses, 900 armories, and 2,700 firehouses.

-The WPA built a total of 40,000 new public buildings and imporived 85,000 others.

-The WPA funded several subsidiary organizations like the National Youth Administration, the Federal Art Project, and the Federal Writers Project, Federal Music Project, and Federal Theater Project.

-WPA workers built 67,000 miles of city streets and 24,000 miles of sidewalk and 25,000 miles of curb.

-Additionally, the WPA built 572,000 miles of rural roads. Of this, 57,000 miles were paved with concrete or macadam.

-Between 1935 and 1943, the WPA employed 8.5 million people directly, reaching a peak of approximately 3.3 million in 1938.

« First ‹ Previous Replies 41 - 50 of 148 Next › Last »
@SecretVeta wrote
at 3:31 PM, Monday December 26, 2011 EST
As far as stagflation occurring - everything I've heard from guys on Wallstreet (my millionaire cousin that works for that hedgefund and his coworkers) is that the dollar will likely deflate in the near future. Cash will be tight and spending will be as well and consequently a dollar will buy you more goods comparatively once this begins. This was predicted for around 2013 - to put this in reference, the same people told me that food riots were going to be likely by 2011 and global riots by 2012 (so far we've exceeded expectations on the last two). This was all in 2009 but they haven't changed their opinions since then. My cousin did retire from that hedgefund though earlier this year so I probably won't be getting to see their exclusive analysis anymore - I'd venture to guess most hedgefunds are on the same track though.


So as far as stagflation occurring or deflation occurring, let's just keep this thread in mind and wait and see. We can make it a gentleman's wager.

As far as the United States being Austrian since 1980 I was more referring to some Austrian policies and that some economists that advised our presidents in the last few decades were definitely not true keyenesians. Milton Friedman himself - as you said, did not entirely subscribe to keynes later on in his life. In fact while he was in the White House Reagan repealed a ton of regulation on a variety of industries (while selling crack to black people), lowered taxes to an all time low (before increasing them again) and tripled the public debt.

So the government did adopt a less keynesian approach to fiscal policy since the 1980s and that is undisputable - was it ever truly Austrian though? Obviously not, Hayek and the Austrian school of thought even argues against national currencies, on top of being against the centralization of banking. Did some more politically convenient aspects of Austrian thought pervade fiscal and monetary policy in the last 30 years? Yes I would assert that the 20 years Republicans were in the white house very much did advocate aspects of the Austrian school - like lower taxes, decreasing government injected spending, etc. In the 11 years that Democrats were in the white house I'd still the same is still true - people forget that Clinton only raised the income taxes back to what they were under Reagan essentially. We're still operating with a historically low income tax for the top income brackets. This in my opinion is a mistake. The government should hike up taxes immensely, start building bridges, roads, schools and hospitals and put people back to work. This is an indirect spending injection (the idea being that the people that take these jobs will naturally spend their money on essential goods and services like food and clothes).
@SecretVeta wrote
at 3:39 PM, Monday December 26, 2011 EST
Lastly, Krugman never revised his statements suggesting that 800 billion would be too little. Originally Krugman suggested that the government issue at least 1.4 trillion in injected spending. This could've been accomplished in a variety of ways but ultimately the easiest to swallow/get through the obstructionist congress was a tax refund of 800 billion.

As the situation got worse Krugman did say it would take even more spending injection to change the momentum of the market and ultimately said something along the lines of 2 trillion. Comparing this to what FDR did (in the OP) it's still nowhere near the cash injection FDR had planned (most of which was in the form of construction projects). The ultimate spending injection came when the government took on MASSIVE amounts of debt relative to GDP and then in turn used that money to build arms for WW2. Imagine if WW2 never happened and the US used all that capital on things that the entire public would benefit from: bridges, roads, schools, universal healthcare, etc. The spending injection would be the same but we'd have much more to reap from it as a society.

Now the popular counter point to this is that WW2 also drove unemployment down to zero by employing soldiers and sending them overseas. Yes, that is true - but those soldiers were also getting compensated (on top of the GI Bill). So ultimately the government just employed everyone in a rather efficient and immediate manner. And that my friend, is exactly what keynes advocated.
@SecretVeta wrote
at 3:43 PM, Monday December 26, 2011 EST
I'll add that a tax refund is also the WORST form of spending injection - it's indirect and it's hard to guarantee the money will all be spent in the first place. Or that the money will have a great multiplier effect.

Coincidentally the most effective form of spending injection for the last few decades has been food stamps, with a multiplier of about 2.73. The multiplier for tax cuts/refunds has been recently measured at around .72. Meaning for each dollar injected into the economy .28 is not spent or spent in a foreign economy.
deadcode wrote
at 4:26 PM, Monday December 26, 2011 EST
You first post is great. Very good information; some of which I agree with and/or constantly have on my radar when watching the market.

Here are my comments on it:

Veta: "As far as stagflation occurring - everything I've heard from guys on Wallstreet (my millionaire cousin that works for that hedgefund and his coworkers) is that the dollar will likely deflate in the near future. Cash will be tight and spending will be as well and consequently a dollar will buy you more goods comparatively once this begins."

I believe the end game is inflationary; but I totally agree with the possibility that the next move is deflationary. In fact; it is pretty logical. Europe is gonna get nasty; and I believe people will flee the Euro into the Dollar creating deflationary trends. Gold is already signaling that it going to relax a bit; and it has some downside room before the 200MA.

I figure it is likely for the dollar to rally a bit; gold to trade sideways possibly drop a bit. This deflation will cause weakness in the market and Bernanke will start printing again to keep the S&P from crashing.

Veta: "This was predicted for around 2013 - to put this in reference, the same people told me that food riots were going to be likely by 2011 and global riots by 2012 (so far we've exceeded expectations on the last two). This was all in 2009 but they haven't changed their opinions since then."

I hear similar things but without the time frames. I think food shortages will be an absolute certainty; as will riots. I also believe that the deflationary/inflationary cycle we are in is never ending; till the debt is liquidated.

Veta: "So as far as stagflation occurring or deflation occurring, let's just keep this thread in mind and wait and see. We can make it a gentleman's wager."

I agree.

Veta: "As far as the United States being Austrian since 1980 I was more referring to some Austrian policies and that some economists that advised our presidents in the last few decades were definitely not true keyenesians. Milton Friedman himself - as you said, did not entirely subscribe to keynes later on in his life. In fact while he was in the White House Reagan repealed a ton of regulation on a variety of industries (while selling crack to black people), lowered taxes to an all time low (before increasing them again) and tripled the public debt."

I agree mostly; I think the parts I don't agree with are obvious. Reagan was more Austrian sure; but certainly not entirely Austrian. He was kinda a mix between Austrian, Monetarism, and Keynesian. And by "he" i mean his advisers.

Veta: "So the government did adopt a less keynesian approach to fiscal policy since the 1980s and that is undisputable - was it ever truly Austrian though? Obviously not, Hayek and the Austrian school of thought even argues against national currencies, on top of being against the centralization of banking. Did some more politically convenient aspects of Austrian thought pervade fiscal and monetary policy in the last 30 years?"

I agree. (in principle) Although; the republicans adherence to Austrian economics is mostly lip-service. Basically they talk and good talk; and maybe even enact some of the popular shit; but never actually follow the principles. Ron Paul being one of the exceptions.

Veta: "We're still operating with a historically low income tax for the top income brackets. This in my opinion is a mistake. The government should hike up taxes immensely, start building bridges, roads, schools and hospitals and put people back to work. This is an indirect spending injection (the idea being that the people that take these jobs will naturally spend their money on essential goods and services like food and clothes)."

This is were I start to disagree. Spending more at this point; requires us to print more money; which in turn will create inflation.

I know you don't like the gold standard; but perhaps you would agree that the current situation would have been avoided if it were in place.
skrumgaer wrote
at 5:39 PM, Monday December 26, 2011 EST
Citations?

Veta, you have offered these figures before and gave citations for them. If you offer them again, you need to offer the citations again.
fcuku_ wrote
at 7:22 PM, Monday December 26, 2011 EST
Skrum does realize that this isnt a scholarly journal right?
@SecretVeta wrote
at 8:29 PM, Monday December 26, 2011 EST
they've been cited by the CBO already - you know that skrum. We also agreed that if the numbers were false it would be perjury - punishable to fullest extent of the law.

tl;dr: CBO, gtfo
deadcode wrote
at 9:20 PM, Monday December 26, 2011 EST
Veta as a request could you post the CBO article about the .72 and 2.73 multiplier on Tax cuts vs Welfare respectively?

I'm not saying it doesn't exist; but I am interested in seeing it. So far all attempts to track it down have been in vain.

I've searched 'CBO muliplyer .72 welfare tax cut 2.73' and bunch of variations of the above and I haven't found anything.

Point me in the direction so I can read it. I'm interested in the analysis but I haven't been able to locate the source.
deadcode wrote
at 9:20 PM, Monday December 26, 2011 EST
mulitplier*
@SecretVeta wrote
at 10:11 PM, Monday December 26, 2011 EST
don't have the original chart me and skrum are referencing but it was by moody's economy.

This is what I found and the figures I think I was referring to were the returns on a per dollar basis. So if the actual multiplier of food stamps is say 1.73 then the amount of money spent in the economy per 1 dollar spent on food stamps amounts to 2.73 (1+1.73=2.73). That's where that number came from.

Anyway here's the actual congressional testimony so we can adhere to it rather than flawed recollections (mine and skrums).

http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/Small%20Business_7_24_08.pdf

this link explains it pretty well:
http://www.jec.senate.gov/republicans/public/?a=Files.Serve&File_id=aa63e97b-ad62-4910-884f-54ff1aa67c6f
KDice - Multiplayer Dice War
KDice is a multiplayer strategy online game played in monthly competitions. It's like Risk. The goal is to win every territory on the map.
CREATED BY RYAN © 2006 - 2026
GAMES
G GPokr
Texas Holdem Poker
K KDice
Online Strategy
X XSketch
Online Pictionary