March 4, 1933
It was eighty years ago today....
"This
is a day of national consecration. I am certain that my fellow
Americans expect that on my induction into the Presidency I will address
them with a candor and a decision which the present situation of our
Nation impels. This is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the
whole truth, frankly and boldly. Nor need we shrink from honestly facing
conditions in our country today. This great nation will endure as it
has endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all, let me
assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself
- nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyses needed
efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our
national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that
understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to
victory. I am convinced that you will again give that support to
leadership in these critical days."
Franklin Delano Roosevelt
First Inaugural Address
March 4, 1933
At 1:08 PM, eighty years ago today, Franklin Roosevelt placed his left hand upon an old and cherished family bible which was opened to the thirteenth chapter of St. Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians:
"And now abideth faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love."
So was inaugurated (in my humble opinion) the president who is second only to Lincoln in terms of sheer greatness. Some historians ague that he is America's greatest chief executive. I'm more than willing to go down that road, too.
In his excellent (and highly recommended) book on the New Deal's first one-hundred days, "The Defining Moment", Jonathon Alter describes vividly what FDR was facing in the weeks leading up to his swearing in:
.jpg)
"The banking crisis peaked just before his inauguration. With the upper Midwest in turmoil, Cleveland banks began to fold, threatening the Ohio banking structure. New Jersey passed an emergency law limiting withdrawals, causing a spread of panicky behavior in the East. In a three-day period starting February 23, Indiana, Arkansas and Maryland declared holidays [in order to close the banks], kicking off a round of more closures the following week. By Saturday, February 25, the Hoover White House received word to expect rioting on Monday in Detroit. where the banks had been closed for nearly two weeks. People couldn't buy gasoline, milk, or bread. Railroad cars stayed on sidings. Thousands of automobiles were abandoned, out of gas in the middle of the road. The only good news was that this lack of transportation made starting a riot harder."
Twenty-five percent of the American workforce was out of a job - not underemployed mind you - completely out of work. By the end of his second term, the unemployment figures had been cut in half. But it would take the massive rush of war spending in the early forties to end what is now called the "Great Depression".
"The money changers have fled from their high seats in the temple of our civilization. We may now restore that temple to their ancient truths. The measure of restoration lies in the extent to which we apply social values more noble than mere monetary profit."
Franklin Roosevelt saved this country. When he was finished saving the nation that he loved so well, he set about the task of saving the world. At the beginning of his fourth term the toll could be seen etched in his face; he was exhausted and mortally ill. On the afternoon of April 12, 1945, while chatting lightheartedly with two female cousins at his cottage in Warm Springs, Georgia, the president collapsed and died of a massive cerebral hemorrhage. He was sixty-three years old.
There is now a sick form of revisionism that is trying to get us to swallow the nonsensical notion that he destroyed America, that he made the Depression worse; that he was a dictator; that he was a racist; that he let the attack on Pearl Harbor happen....all of it bunk. The propagandists really need to keep to the facts. As I said - and I cannot emphasize this enough - Franklin Roosevelt saved this country. Deal with it.
From the final paragraph from chapter forty of Jonathon Alter's excellent biography of FDR:
"Roosevelt's point was plain: Government counts, and in the right hands, it can be made to work. Strong federal action, not just private voluntary efforts and the invisible hand of the marketplace, was required to help those stricken in an emergency. The American people expected and deserved leadership in addressing their hardships, not just from state and local authorities but from the White House. This fundamental insight would guide politicians and help millions of people in the years ahead, but it was lost on others, who ignored the lessons of Franklin Roosevelt at their peril".
Couldn't have said it better if I tried.
I imagine that I'll be spending a good deal of the rest of the day thinking about and savoring the legacy of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the New Deal. So many of the things we now take for granted would not have been possible without him. You would think the American people would be grateful. Most of them can't even recognize his face. As far as I can tell there has been no mention of this milestone anniversary thus far today in the electronic or print media. America has forgotten its pre-Roosevelt history. That is the reason we were doomed to repeat it. And repeat it we did. Pretty sad.
Oh, and did I mention? By all accounts he was a nice guy.
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
tomdegan@frontiernet.net
AFTERTHOUGHT:
Here are a handful of links to a few pieces I wrote on this site over the years about this great and remarkable American:
http://tomdegan.blogspot.com/2007/09/franklin-d-roosevelts-endangered-legacy.html
`
At 1:08 PM, eighty years ago today, Franklin Roosevelt placed his left hand upon an old and cherished family bible which was opened to the thirteenth chapter of St. Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians:
"And now abideth faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love."
So was inaugurated (in my humble opinion) the president who is second only to Lincoln in terms of sheer greatness. Some historians ague that he is America's greatest chief executive. I'm more than willing to go down that road, too.
In his excellent (and highly recommended) book on the New Deal's first one-hundred days, "The Defining Moment", Jonathon Alter describes vividly what FDR was facing in the weeks leading up to his swearing in:
"The banking crisis peaked just before his inauguration. With the upper Midwest in turmoil, Cleveland banks began to fold, threatening the Ohio banking structure. New Jersey passed an emergency law limiting withdrawals, causing a spread of panicky behavior in the East. In a three-day period starting February 23, Indiana, Arkansas and Maryland declared holidays [in order to close the banks], kicking off a round of more closures the following week. By Saturday, February 25, the Hoover White House received word to expect rioting on Monday in Detroit. where the banks had been closed for nearly two weeks. People couldn't buy gasoline, milk, or bread. Railroad cars stayed on sidings. Thousands of automobiles were abandoned, out of gas in the middle of the road. The only good news was that this lack of transportation made starting a riot harder."Twenty-five percent of the American workforce was out of a job - not underemployed mind you - completely out of work. By the end of his second term, the unemployment figures had been cut in half. But it would take the massive rush of war spending in the early forties to end what is now called the "Great Depression".
"The money changers have fled from their high seats in the temple of our civilization. We may now restore that temple to their ancient truths. The measure of restoration lies in the extent to which we apply social values more noble than mere monetary profit."
Franklin Roosevelt saved this country. When he was finished saving the nation that he loved so well, he set about the task of saving the world. At the beginning of his fourth term the toll could be seen etched in his face; he was exhausted and mortally ill. On the afternoon of April 12, 1945, while chatting lightheartedly with two female cousins at his cottage in Warm Springs, Georgia, the president collapsed and died of a massive cerebral hemorrhage. He was sixty-three years old.There is now a sick form of revisionism that is trying to get us to swallow the nonsensical notion that he destroyed America, that he made the Depression worse; that he was a dictator; that he was a racist; that he let the attack on Pearl Harbor happen....all of it bunk. The propagandists really need to keep to the facts. As I said - and I cannot emphasize this enough - Franklin Roosevelt saved this country. Deal with it.
From the final paragraph from chapter forty of Jonathon Alter's excellent biography of FDR:
"Roosevelt's point was plain: Government counts, and in the right hands, it can be made to work. Strong federal action, not just private voluntary efforts and the invisible hand of the marketplace, was required to help those stricken in an emergency. The American people expected and deserved leadership in addressing their hardships, not just from state and local authorities but from the White House. This fundamental insight would guide politicians and help millions of people in the years ahead, but it was lost on others, who ignored the lessons of Franklin Roosevelt at their peril".Couldn't have said it better if I tried.
I imagine that I'll be spending a good deal of the rest of the day thinking about and savoring the legacy of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the New Deal. So many of the things we now take for granted would not have been possible without him. You would think the American people would be grateful. Most of them can't even recognize his face. As far as I can tell there has been no mention of this milestone anniversary thus far today in the electronic or print media. America has forgotten its pre-Roosevelt history. That is the reason we were doomed to repeat it. And repeat it we did. Pretty sad.
Oh, and did I mention? By all accounts he was a nice guy.
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
tomdegan@frontiernet.net
AFTERTHOUGHT:
Here are a handful of links to a few pieces I wrote on this site over the years about this great and remarkable American:
Franklin Roosevelt's Endangered Legacy:
`
`
`
April 12, 1945-April 12, 2012
`
`
The FDR Library Revisited:
`
`
http://tomdegan.blogspot.com/2012/02/fdr-library-revisited.html
The New Deal at Eighty, Nixon at 100
`
http://tomdegan.blogspot.com/2013/01/new-deal-at-80-nixon-at-100.html
Obama Could Learn from FDR:
http://tomdegan.blogspot.com/2010/11/obama-can-learn-from-fdr.html
Here is a YouTube link to watch a film of President Roosevelt's first inauguration, March 4, 1933, eighty years ago today:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MX_v0zxM23Q
It doesn't get any better than the Frankster!
The New Deal at Eighty, Nixon at 100
`
Obama Could Learn from FDR:
http://tomdegan.blogspot.com/2010/11/obama-can-learn-from-fdr.html
Here is a YouTube link to watch a film of President Roosevelt's first inauguration, March 4, 1933, eighty years ago today:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MX_v0zxM23Q
It doesn't get any better than the Frankster!
posted by Tom Degan @ 7:06 AM
69 comments
69 Comments:
Let’s look at FDR’s jobs record.
After Roosevelt developed jobs programs, unemployment dropped every year of his first term. Employment improved throughout all his terms except for one year. Unemployment went up in 1938 when the Dems caved to GOP pressure.
Here are FDR’s Unemployment rates (Bureau of Labor Statistics)
1932 – 23.6% left by Hoover and the GOP tax cuts and deregulation.
1933 – 24.9% FDR inherits peak GOP unemployment rate
1934 - 21.7%
1935 – 20.1%
1936 – 17%
1937- 14.3%
1938- 19% FDR caves to GOP and cuts spending
1939- 17.2 FDR continues programs
1940- 14.6%
1941- 9.9%
1942 – 4.7% US goes to war
Warren Harding, Calvin Cooledge, Herbert Hoover = Great Depression.
Ronald Reagan, GHW Bush, GW Bush = Great Recession.
There seems to be a pattern there.
Where would be be had Hoover won in 1932? From Novenber 1932 until March 1933 4,ooo banks failed (and no FDIC either).
Not to mention confiscating and handing over all private gold and gold-backed notes to the Federal Reserve bankers in exchange for their fiat currency. Thanks for saving us, Frank !
To be fair, he inherited the illegal Federal Reserve system from Wilson and the Jekyll Island boys, but that action was far more scandalous a “bail out” than anything Bush or Obama ever thought of.
Hey, Ron, You noticed that, too, huh? I thought it was my imagination.
Cheers!
The Department of Homeland Security (through the U.S. Army Forces Command) recently retrofitted 2,717 of these ‘Mine Resistant Protected’ vehicles for service on the streets of the United States.
Although I’ve seen and read several online blurbs about this vehicle of late, I decided to dig slightly deeper and discover more about the vehicle itself.
The new DHS sanctioned ‘Street Sweeper’ (my own slang due to the gun ports) is built by Navistar Defense (NavistarDefense.com), a division within the Navistar organization. Under the Navistar umbrella are several other companies including International Trucks, IC Bus (they make school buses), Monaco RV (recreational vehicles), WorkHorse (they make chassis), MaxxForce (diesel engines), and Navistar Financial (the money arm of the company).
Would FDR be ok with this?
President Obama’s top political appointees average $142,691 annually, more than three times the average American wage of $42,979–a difference of $99,712 a year.
Deep inside a new Government Accountability Office audit of the 321 presidential appointees working for the government are details showing that the 94 who Obama works closest with earn a range of $120,000 to $172,000, a top paycheck that is more than double the median income in Washington, the nation’s highest income region.
A majority of the remaining presidential appointees, said the GAO, work in agencies and on commissions where they earn up to $634 a day. For example, the presidential appointee on the “International Water and Boundary Commission” earns $165,300, and the seven appointees on the Arctic Research Commission make $596 a day.
Anonymous at 3:54 PM - and the point of your comment?
Jim Watson "Anonymous at 3:54 PM - and the point of your comment?"
He's mad about political appointees. I'll grant that he's right about the appointee system, but for the wrong reasons (see: The Problem of Amateur Government).
And did you ever notice how "We have to pay top rates to get and keep the best people" goes right out the window when it comes to the public service?
Thank you for this, Tom! So timely and so necessary. We need a leader like F.D.R. now! I was so hoping President Obama would be channeling him. Alas, methinks not.
I love F,D.R.'s four freedoms. Freedom of speech
Freedom of worship
Freedom from want
Freedom from fear
No one seems to remember this (conveniently) now. Not only that, but my personal heroine, Eleanor Roosevelt. What an amazing woman. F.D.R., A leader who actually cared about poverty, the poor, the elderly. He also created the National Industrial Recovery Act, and the National Labor Relations Act, requiring businesses to negotiate fairly with unions. We desperately need workers to be protected now. I really loved your excellent post.
"Freedom from want"
Pray tell, how do you bring that about?
Airports have denied a claim by Janet Napolitano, the secretary of homeland security, that the sequester is already causing long delays for travelers at security screening checkpoints.
Ms Napolitano said today that major airports were seeing lines “150 to 200 per cent as long as we would normally expect” as result of the federal spending cuts that went
My understanding of the term liberal amongst other things is one who is open to new ideas and not afraid to question their beliefs.
The reason I say that is the unemployment figures Mr. Dubya provides are not the entire picture. The percentages that he quotes includes prisoners, govt relief workers and the institutionalized. The percentage of unemployed provided by the Census Bureau, while following the same curve, are much higher.
In keeping with my opening sentence, I would appeal to you to review the information provided at this link.
blog.heritage.org/2009/01/14/were-spending-more-than-ever-and-it-doesnt-work/
From the Morgenthau Diary, May 9, 1939, Franklin Roosevelt Presidential Library.
this quote can be found.
"We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and if I am wrong…somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises…I say after eight years of this administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started…And an enormous debt to boot!” Secretary of the Treasury, Henry Morgenthau, Jr. speaking to the House Ways and Means Committee, eight years after the start of New Deal.
I understand that I am asking lot of those who hold FDR and his programs in high
esteem. All I am asking of you is to be liberal, open minded, thinkers and review other points of view of the FDR legacy. Please do not be out of hand dismissive. Please do not dismiss the information because of it's source.
Above stats sourced from BLS.
The percentage of unemployed provided by the Census Bureau, while following the same curve, are much higher.
Sourced from Right Wing BS.
Census stats:
http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1528.html
"I say after eight years of this administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started."
The Morganthau quote is wrong per both Census and BLS stats.
Morganthau also said, "We have never begun to tax the people in this country the way they should be..... I don't pay what I should. People in my class don't. People who have it should pay.”
Go figure.
Ok. I went to the link and guess what? The graph there shows Morgenthau was incorrect.
But then, who needs them librool facs an figggers?
Dave
Explain how Morgenthau was wrong, I'll let your other thoughtful open minded quotes stand n their own merit.
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks…will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered…. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."
- Thomas Jefferson
"Issue of currency should be lodged with the government and be protected from domination by Wall Street. We are opposed to…provisions [which] would place our currency and credit system in private hands."
– Theodore Roosevelt
"The real truth of the matter is,as you and I know, that a financial
element in the large centers has owned the government ever since
the days of Andrew Jackson…"
- attributed to Franklin D. Roosevelt in a letter
“It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and money system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.”
- Henry Ford
I submit that herein lies the true source of our ills, rather than differences in Republican/Democrat politics...
Our economic system is built upon private banking interests who have, for a century now, been given the power to create currency literally out of thin air and to manipulate its value - and thus exhert control over the assets of the United States.
That we continue to fight each other over relatively meaningless ideas, thrills them to no end, I'm sure. I'm not saying there's anything that can be done, but at least let's understand the source of the problem.
A question for you Tom.
The CBO reports that the Federal govt will receive a new record $2.7 trillion in tax revenues in 2013.
With 48% of those who file a federal tax return not owing any income tax, then how can it be claimed that the 52% who are paying taxes to operate our govt, need to pay more?
Record income for the govt at a time when the percent of Americans working is at it's lowest since 1939. How much more?
Is it possible that our govt does not have a revenue problem but a spending problem?
For the last 30 plus years we have doing everything the conservative way:
tax cuts, deregulation, free trade, tax cuts, out sourcing, right to work laws, privatization, wars, tax cuts
What has it gotten us? Huge corporate profits, staggering wealth accumulation for the richest, and stagnant wages and increased unemployment and insecurity for the working class despite increased productivity.
For working people conservatism is an absolute failure.
Harley,
Good points. We can either have Big Money owning our government or we can fight for restoring our vestiges of democracy. One Party is completely anti-democracy and the other is only a weak-willed defender of democracy.
This is why Big Money is winning and democracy is losing.
The foundation of the class war against American workers is here:
"I could hire one half of the working class to kill the other half." – “Robber Baron” Jay Gould
The banks -- hard to believe in a time when we're facing a banking crisis, that many of the banks created, are still the most powerful lobby on Capitol Hill. And they frankly own the place. – Senator Dick Durbin
As long as "conservatives" stand in support of Big Money on every issue, democracy will continue to be dismantled by "divide and conquor" tactics espoused by Gould.
So Laneman, you believe in the economic theory that when people get wealthy it will cause others to become poorer? That if a corporation grows wealth, it must be at the expense of someone who becomes poorer? That the level of wages are tied directly to how much wealth a group of people have? That unemployment is caused by people becoming wealthy?
Does your economic theory explain why this happens and what is the solution? Does the government taking wealth from one person/business make another person have more wealth?
Wouldn't it seem more logical to believe that when the govt takes away the wealth of some, it only brings their living standard down, and does not raise the living standards of others? What will the govt do for income if they take the wealth of a few down to the level of the many? Will they then have to get from the many their needed revenue to operate their govt services? And when this happens, will the many now have a better or poorer living standard as the govt takes more of their wealth?
Wouldn't it seem more reasonable for govt to reduce their spending in order to prevent this? Govt does not create wealth, it consumes it. Once wealth is consumed govt can not recreated it.
DD -
What I'm saying is, regardless of whether a Republican, Democrat, Whig, Green Party, etc... is in the White House or in Congress, "big money" DOES own the country - something bigger than most understand. No if's or but's. They have (officially) since the creation of the Federal Reserve. Democrats and Republicans alike have marched to their tune for a century.
As M. Rothschild may or may not have said (though I'm sure he believed something along these lines)...
"Let me issue and control a nation's money, and I care not who makes its laws"
I don't think it means party politics are completely meaningless, but their impact on our economy far less important that most believe (in my humble opinion).
Chuck Morre:
Do you know what the ultimate source of all wealth is?
No Lineman, tell me the ultimate source of all wealth is.
Hugo Chavez is dead. Wonder if Hitler and Stalin, two other famous socialists, greeted him in the afterlife?
Dave Dubya commented at 11:41 AM – “Morganthau also said, ‘We have never begun to tax the people in this country the way they should be..... I don't pay what I should. People in my class don't. People who have it should pay.’ ”
Some facts on the maximum income tax rates (Source - http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/history-of-federal-individual-1.html):
From 1933 to 1935 – 63% (FDR)
From 1936 to 1939 – 79% (FDR)
From 1952 to 1963 – 91% (92% in 1952 and 1953) (Eisenhower)
From 2003 to 2011 – 35% (GW Bush)
While many people quote the number of people who pay no income tax, those people paying no income tax are mostly the working poor. From the first dollar earned by the working poor, 15.3% goes to the Federal government for Social Security and Medicare taxes and the truly rich pay either none or a scant percentage for those taxes. Not to pick on Governor Scott (Florida) or Mitt Romney but using them only as verifiable examples, they paid income taxes of less than 15% of their millions of income. I do not begrudge them their income. I just think it is wrong that they pay the Federal government a smaller percentage for taxes than is paid by the working poor.
Thanks for the information Ron.
But what has it do to with mt post to Laneman?
"The Democracy Will Cease To Exist When You Take Away From Those Who Are Willing To Work And Give To Those Who Would Not."
-- Thomas Jefferson
@Jeffersons..Teacher! Teacher!
"Deficits don't matter"
Dick Cheney.
See, I can come up with a meaningless and inane quote just like "Jefferson" did.
Yes Concernicus you can come up with a meaningless and inane quote.
But yours is just more so.
I guess if Tom's hero, FDR, can put American citizens in concentration camps without a trial, then it's ok for Dave's hero Obama to say it's legal to kill American citizens on American soil by drones and with out a trial.
Amazing how far liberals have advance the cause of the common man since 1942.
Chuck Morre said at 7:46 PM, “Thanks for the information Ron. But what has it do to with mt post to Laneman?”
Short answer – it had absolutely nothing to do with Chuck’s post, nor was it intended to have anything to do with that thread.
Ron,
Take your 1936-39 figures, for example - that doesn't tell the whole story. Just to clarify...
The marginal 79% rate in 1936-39 was for earned income above an adjusted rate of ~$5,000,000. The minimum rate was 4%.
In Bush era tax structure, the marginal (top) rate was for income over about $300,000-350,000.
Also, you tell me - I don't know. How successful were they back in FDR's day at extracting 80% of income above $5,000,000 of what would have been the filthy rich class? If I was a betting man, I'd say they didn't get much of it... You don't take rich folks money - never have, never will...
"Taxes should be proportioned to what may be annually spared by
the individual." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1784.
"Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is
to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the
higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they
rise." --Thomas Jefferson
"I hope we shall... crush in its birth the aristocracy of our
moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our
government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of
our country." --Thomas Jefferson to George Logan, 1816
That goldurn socialist.
Chuck
The ultimate source of all wealth are natural resources and labor. Business and corporations exploit natural resources and labor to make money (i.e. generate capital). The executives and boards of directors decide what is done with the capital that is generated. The workers have little or no say in what is done with the profits they generate through their labor. This is why capitalism is inherently undemocratic. Corporations are top down dictatorial organizations that concentrate power at the top. That power is used to concentrate the capital the corporation generated into few hands which creates more power for the corporation and its executives and board members. That power is then used to influence and ultimately control the rules of society for their benefit. Government in our country is meant to be a democratic force that is meant to be check on that power for the benefit of its citizens. Government provides certain things for society that business cannot or will not because it is unprofitable or interferes with its ability to persue profit above all else without restriction. The wealthy and corporations have bought out and largely control government for their benefit. They have promoted and passed policies (noted in my previous post), especially over the last few decades, that they benefit from. For their class it has been a spectacular success. Corporate profits are soaring. Wealth and power is more concentrated than ever before. Meanwhile for the working classes wages have remained stagnant, good jobs have disappeared, the costs of housing, health care, and education have gone up at rates well beyond that of inflation and government is unwilling or unable to respond to their concerns.
Harley A commented at 9:23 AM - “Also, you tell me - I don't know. How successful were they back in FDR's day at extracting 80% of income above $5,000,000 of what would have been the filthy rich class? If I was a betting man, I'd say they didn't get much of it... You don't take rich folks money - never have, never will...”
Harley, I may be an old geezer and have been a CPA for more than 50 years, but I have no idea of income taxes paid by filthy rich (your term) individuals during the Great Depression. I am old enough to remember the Great Depression, however, and people were either poor or very, very rich. The middle class, as we came to know it after WW2, was almost wiped out in the 1930’s.
I am an avid reader of history and I remind my clients that we all know that Al Capone was reputedly a very bad man. And the only thing they could convict him of was (drum roll, please) tax evasion. Al probably felt right at home in Alcatraz, but I believe a filthy rich person would do everything possible to avoid prison. Even (gasp) pay income taxes.
I tell a favorite story about why in 1929 and 1930 so many former millionaires jumped out of windows high up in tall buildings. Many people became millionaires in the roaring twenties. They could become a millionaire by taking $100,000 and investing it in the stock market and voila, they had a stock portfolio of $1,000,000. That was before the SEC and other Depression era safeguards. You could buy stocks then on 10% margin (today it is 50%). From Black Thursday (October 24, 1929) to Black Tuesday (October 29, 1929) the “market” lost 21 % of its value. Margin calls wiped out the entire stock portfolios of many so-called “millionaires.” Those who still had money in the bank to help them survive found out what happens when a bank fails (no FDIC until the mid-1930’s). Soon it started raining people instead of raindrops.
I still lament the end in 1999 of the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act. The ineffable Phil Gramm led the effort to repeal that Act, which mandated a separation between commercial depository banks and investment banks. Fast forward to September 2008. Read more at http://www.counterpunch.org/2008/09/19/shattering-the-glass-steagall-act/.
Gee Laneman I thought you were talking about the Federal Govt when you said:
"the executives and boards of directors decide what is done with the capital that is generated. The workers have little or no say in what is done with the profits they generate through their labor."
Unless of course the workers decided to buy stock in the company were they have chosen to work! Govt is a monopoly.
First of all the worker does not have to work for the company if they don't like what the company does with the profits or what they pay. Workers are not slaves.
Next the workers wages come out of the profits the company they work for creates and share with the worker in the form of income. No profits, no wages.
"Corporations are top down dictatorial organizations that concentrate power at the top." Support your claim please.
"Meanwhile for the working classes wages have remained stagnant, good jobs have disappeared, the costs of housing, health care, and education have gone up at rates well beyond that of inflation and government is unwilling or unable to respond to their concerns." And this all because the govt is not taxing enough from the wealthy to bring down their income to the same level as their workers? Makes no sense.
I think you have over looked the role of competition in your manifesto. Corporations compete for the best labor at the best price in the market place. If the skills are not there or the wage demands are too high to allow a return on the stock holder investments, they will look else were.(A good faith effort to get a return on their investment is by law required of any company that sells parts of its self when it goes onto the stock market.) Corporations compete in the market place for a larger and larger share of the market place. The two ways most commonly used to grow a share of the market is by price or quality/value of the product. The consumer, you, me the govt, uses those two reason to make a purchase, price and or value, not always in that order. Would you spend your wages on a product that was priced too high for the market or did not give you value?
The duty of a business regardless of it's size is not to provide jobs. The reason for a business is not to create jobs. The duty of a business is to create wealth. It's duty is to make a profit to stay in business.
The example you gave to support your answer is flawed if for no other reason that it does not take into consideration the freedom a worker has to move to another job if they don't like the one they are at now. Or to start their own business. Americans are not serfs like those in Russia before 1917.
Your answer does not address what you think the role of govt is with its power to take away wealth. How does taxing away the wealth improve the people who are not as wealthy? Create more govt jobs? Make the less wealthy feel better? What product does a govt job produce that competes in the market place for your money? Can you buy govt made shoes?
If we have a grown public sector jobs market, where are the majority of the taxes coming from to pay the govt workers? It is coming from a smaller percentage of the population every year. Now 47% of Americans do not pay income tax. When that reaches 51%, what would compel the tax paying 49% to continue to work for less and less money after taxes? Can you see when that happens there will be no money to pay the govt workers their wages?
Chuck Morre "Now 47% of Americans do not pay income tax..."
So how much income tax should the low income unemployed, elderly, students and working poor (particularly those with children) pay, anyway?
More than the zero they pay now!
youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=QPKKQnijnsM#!
Results of Harvard study on wealth in American
Laneman,
I see there's no refutation of your points and even unwitting agreement with this:
"Business and corporations exploit natural resources and labor to make money"
Corporations compete for the best labor at the best price in the market place.
Enter "Globalism" and exploitation of cheap Asian labor at the expense of American workers.
And thus our jobs are off-shored by trade agreements written by corporations and their bought and paid for politicians.
I'd say that also more than supports your claim, "Corporations are top down dictatorial organizations that concentrate power at the top."
Righties are indoctrinated into the "divine right of wealth" cult. There should no power higher than wealth, not even a government intended to be of, by, and for the people.
This is whey they cannot see any of the points we make. It is out of their belief system, and therefor unacceptable.
Some truly conservative folks like Harley understand. This is the difference between real conservatism and Republican Right Wing hijacking of conservatism.
There is a rational basis for conservative thinking. Right Wing ideology is not rational. It is divine right of wealth.
There's the real bottom line.
DD -
There's certainly a difference between being a conservative and being Randian in one's thinking. To deny that "capitalism" can be and is exploited is willful ignorance. I think to truly defend an idea, I need to be intellectually honest about its limitations and potential misuses. There is no "system" that is without its pitfalls...
Ron -
Didn't mean to indicate you were THAT old! Just that you were much closer to the era than most of us ;)
"Corporations compete for the best labor at the best price in the market place.
Enter "Globalism" and exploitation of cheap Asian labor at the expense of American workers."
The term "exploitation" is defined by the eye of the beholder. What might seem cheap to you might be middle class wages to others.
And your solution is to do what? Have a world wide minimum wage? Now that Dave, would be true Globalism.
Further since the USA is still a part of the globe, (unless Pyongyang is able to carry out their threat) doesn't it stand to reason that that we would be a part of the global economy?
"Righties are indoctrinated into the "divine right of wealth" cult. Dave in all of my 65 years, I have never ever run into someone who hated a specific group of people they have never met all of them as much as you do anyone who makes more money than you do.
Have you ever wondered if this all consuming hatred might be a self made road block to creating wealth your self? Racism is defined as "Prejudice or discrimination directed against someone of a different race based on such a belief". Change terms from racism and race to "class envy", or "hate the rich" and I believe you would be given as the example in a dictionary. With your photo next to it no less.
What is most amazing in your response is they are almost word for word from the pages of CPUSA website.
Here is a cut and paste if you haven't check in lately:
World communist parties: "Socialism is the future"
"Socialism is the future" was the theme of a meeting here of communist and workers parties from 59 countries last month.
Cool huh?
Well, Chuck, how about, instead of falsely accusing others of commie hatred, why don't you prove me wrong and tell us where you disagree with the political agenda of the financial elites?
Mmmkay?
Dave, don't you just hate when the rich flaunt their wealth and go on vacation s the little man can't afford?
President Obama and his family are likely headed to Martha’s Vineyard for a summer sojourn again this year.
Didn't accuse you of "commie" hatred, just full fledged racist like hatred of the RICH. Then, (I cant believe I have to do this for you), I said that some times your posts read like something right out of the CPUSA web page. For which I gave you an example. "World communist parties: "Socialism is the future"
As for proving anything, I'll leave that up to you. My only Crusade is to keep the Constitution obeyed and unchanged except by the means provided for there in. See, I don't agree with Federalism as it is evolved into today. I support the right provided for by the Constitution of a State to ban or allow things within its boarders. That has been taken away by the Federal Govt.
Example: I believe the Federal Govt has no business in passing laws on who can and who can't get married. The Federal Govt does not issue marriage licenses. The Constitution says nothing about marriage. I believe that it is up to the State to make that determination as the State is the one who issues the marriage license. Personally, I believe marriage means between a man and a woman. If the State I live in were allowed (which they should be) by the Federal Govt to issue marriage license to same sex marriages, if I didn't like it I could move to another State which shared my beliefs. The State has that power not the Federal Govt.
I see the liberty being taken from citizens of Progressive City's, like NYC..Just look at their bans of soft drink sizes for starters. However regardless if I agree or not, the law was passed and being enforced at the correct level of govt. I can always move or go to NJ for large gulp of cola.
Look at the most recent debate of the question of does the President have the power to ORDER the killing of an American Citizen. Constitution says every American Citizen has the right of due process in the legal system. Doesn't it frighten you to think that basic right is at risk or that there was even a question that it could be ordered? Yet we know FDR order thousands of innocent American Citizens into concentration camps based solely based on their race. Where in the Constitution is either power given to the Federal Govt?
While you rage at the rich and fear globalism, I fear our Federal Govt becoming larger and more centralized in its power, power not allowed for in our Constitution.
Ok, CM,
Since you made the effort of expressing some kind of “manifesto”, to borrow your term, I’ll return the courtesy.
Denial of your accusation is futile, You called my words communist and accused me of hating rich people, like you believe all commies do.
We notice you have difficulty making any argument that doesn’t throw in some projection of hate. Do you need to accuse us of hatred because that is the only way you seem to understand differences? We oppose the narrow agenda of the economic elites, or the imposition of religion in public policy, and you can’t see that as anything but hate?
Is your mind so narrow you can’t see the difference between opposing the political agenda and power over public policy of the financial elites, and hating rich people? Is it your belief that to disagree is to hate? Perhaps that speaks of your nature more than that of others.
Listen, most of us expressed our outrage over the Constitutional abuses in the so called war on terror. Liberals were called traitors when we called out Bush/Cheney torture, imprisonment without charges, and warrantless surveillance of Americans. Liberals have been similarly outraged when such abuses were initiated in the war on drugs. How Constitutional is it to tell people what not to ingest, by their own free will, into their bodies? Or who they can, and cannot, love and marry?
You see, we all have our opinions now don’t we?
We appreciate your view that states should have the right to allow slavery, had we not passed the 13th Amendment, you still didn’t answer my small request.
As far as we can see, your opinion on all public policy is exactly what the greediest sociopathic CEOs want when they buy political representation. The elite few should dictate the laws of the land and democracy is to be suppressed.
How Constitutional does that sound?
Dave, I have to say that was one of the better post I have read on the Rant. You will not change Chucks opinion but I appreciate the effort.
Harley A said at 3:40 PM yesterday, “Ron- Didn't mean to indicate you were THAT old! Just that you were much closer to the era than most of us.”
Harley, there is an old Irish saying – “Do not resent growing old. Many are denied the privilege.” Consider the alternative of not growing old. Old is good, and I embrace it.
I remember in the latter years of the Great Depression the hoboes knocking on our door and asking politely for a crust of bread because they had not eaten in three days (and they looked it). Although we were decidedly “poor” my grandmother never failed to provide a peanut butter and jelly sandwich and a glass of milk. We lived with my grandparents who grew up in early post-famine Ireland. If I were not old I would not have all those wonderful memories.
I came of age in the WW2 postwar years. As a country we did many magnificent things. I remember people going to college on the GI Bill, as an undereducated generation went to college and later sent men to the moon and “returned them safely” (JFK speak). I remember how we rebuilt the countries we had recently devastated in WW2. The Berlin airlift and the candy drops for the children as the planes approached for landing. It was a wonderful era.
Please feel free to indicate that I am THAT old, and all I can say is, “Thank you very much.”
Ron, you always post gems here. Have you ever thought of starting your own blog? You really should. I would plug the heck out of it!
Cheers!
Tom
Ron
I certainly don't resent gowing old - I'm working on it myself - though not as gracefully as I'd wish all the time!
Good thoughts...
Tom,
Thank you for a high compliment from the master of the art.
Ron
Dd,
I must have missed your outrage at Obama Biden for doing the same things that Bush did. And I guess if your dont think how you have discribed the wealthy as hateful, well I guess that's something I will just have to get used to.
However, do you use the terms towards the very rich Geo Soros or Bill Gates ? If you have, I've missed it. Do you either of them have bought am election or influenced a vote?
How do you explain the high price of gas today? Do you blame Obama, like Bush was blamed?
Have you ever questioned why many of the products made n Mexico after having left the US are now in China? It's the rule I explained, business is always looking for the lowest cost to produce their product. India will be the next place that will be moved to.
And until there is a global govt forcing a world wide min wage that's the way it's going to be. .
If your pissed at me for quoting the CPUSA statement about socialism, I suggest you take it up with them, I didn't make that up. More importantly is what they said true or not? Do you agree or disagree with their claim? That's what I'd like to know
Would FDR approve Homeland Security buying over 1 billion rounds of pistol ammo?
Would FDR approve Homeland Security buying 2400 armored military developed vehicles?
Just who exactly is Homeland Security seeing as a threat that requires these purchases? The Armed Forces (including the National Guard) are for National Security from foreign powers. But what is Homeland Security supposed to defend us from?
The Armed Forces are under the control of the President,it's members have taken an oath to defend and obey the Constitution of the United States. Are the armed members of Homeland Security required to take the same oath?
Who is controls the drones flying over us? The Armed Forces, the CIA, the FBI, Homeland Security the White House?
Maybe its time we put FDR and his legacy behind us, maybe it's time we quit blaming the rich and conservatives for the failures of liberalism to correct.
Maybe it's time to question this Administration motives and demand from them the truth.
"The ultimate source of all wealth are natural resources and labor."
I guess we should all become farmers like Jefferson said which according to him was the only place where true wealth was created. Working from sun up to sun down 7 days a week. Wonder why in the 1900s there was a mass migration from the "wealthy" farms to working in the factory to "be exploited" by the "evil corporations". Did the capitalists force these people into "slave labor" in the factories?
In your utopian fantasy world, did Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, ... , Steve Jobs contribute to the wealth of others?
Did the highly paid workers at Henry Ford's plant "steal" from someone else in order to get their higher wages?
You have your head so stuffed up the arsehole of Karl Marx. But you and Dave Dubya must have some wonderful utopian and equality conversations in that little think tank!
My goodness! Someone has anger issues. It's hard to see and think clearly while holding on to such anger, I'd suppose.
Liberals are rarely so angry they accuse those who disagree with them of being Nazis.
But man! We are often called commies for disagreeing with the radical Righties.
Keep projecting the hate and accusations,sonny boy. It paints your style of "conned-servatism" quite clearly.
And just because Hitler and his ilk did the same towards those they didn't like, that won't mean we'd call you Nazis. You just sound like them, that's all.
Dave Dubya,
In your utopian fantasy world, did Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, ... , Steve Jobs contribute to the wealth of others?
Did the highly paid workers at Henry Ford's plant "steal" from someone else in order to get their higher wages?
Can you answer these questions or will you just avoid answers as usual and tap-dance around the fact that you are a marxist with his head up his ass when it comes to economics?
I understand your anger of having a liberal arts degree and being on the debate team but have had to settle for a SHITTY job as a prison guard that any Cro-Magnon is qualified for!
Anger issues confirmed. False accusations and hate still flying out of the narrow mind.
This is your brain on "conned-servatism".
Dave Dubya,
I'm sorry such an advanced thinking leaning forward person like yourself has only achieved such a SHITTY cro-magnon job as a prison guard in life.
My condolences for your under achievement in life.
Coming from a Neanderthal that's quite a compliment. Thank you. ;-)
Angry at socialist like you DD who claim that capitalism is destroying our democracy when if fact it's the welfare society you progressives have created that is doing all the destroying.
Just like Jefferson said it would.
"The Democracy Will Cease To Exist When You Take Away From Those Who Are Willing To Work And Give To Those Who Would Not."
Just another example of Big Centralized FDR style liberal government not working as planned.
Some New Jersey hurricane victims are complaining that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is doing more harm than Superstorm Sandy did when it hit over four months ago and washed away their homes and businesses.
What would FDR do?
(CNSNews.com) – The number of Americans designated as “not in the labor force” in February was 89,304,000, a record high, up from 89,008,000 in January, according to the Department of Labor. This means that the number of Americans not in the labor force increased 296,000 between January and February.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) labels people who are unemployed and no longer looking for work as “not in the labor force,” including people who have retired on schedule, taken early retirement, or simply given up looking for work.
The increase marks the second month in a row, after rising in January from 88.8 million in December. Those not in the labor force had declined in December from 88.9 million in November.
The nation’s unemployment rate decreased to 7.7 percent in February, down from 7.9 percent in January. Overall unemployment “has shown little movement, on net, since September 2012,” the Labor Department said.
Even the Pat Robertson "News" admits unemployment rate decreased to 7.7 percent in February
The skyrocketing unemployment Bush left Obama has finally been reversed to lower than what they left him.
And look what else is happening as the crybaby cult whines about "socialism".
Their heroes are raking it in and hoarding it.
Some "job creators".
Corporate profits hit record as wages get squeezed
DD, I could have a million dollars if I had made bet that you would blame Bush in your reply to to the post of 11:45 AM.
Whose is Pat Robertson? What does she know about how many Americans are still unemployed after 4 years of Obama's failed policy's?
"Whose is Pat Robertson? What does she know about how many Americans are still unemployed after 4 years of Obama's failed policy's?"
Please keep these priceless gems coming. Just another glaring example of the idiocy of the right wing.
Tom,
I am really surprised you didn't get the joke I just pulled on you. See progressive lefties think we on the right have no sence of humor. Same mistake DD makes when he expresses his unbounding hate of any one who is wealthy. He assumes they worship money.
Stereotyping of those you don't like or agree with, a political form of racism, you assume to know all there is to know about those you disagree with and dislike.
You assume that we conservatives do not have a sense
of humor, marry our first cousins, sleep with our livestock, are missing most pf our front teeth and have a wardrobe made of nothing more than Arkansas Tuxidos.
It's foolish to underestimate those who you disagree with
Tom,
Look, another "joke".
Same mistake DD makes when he expresses his unbounding hate of any one who is wealthy. He assumes they worship money.
Stereotyping of those you don't like or agree with, a political form of racism, you assume to know all there is to know about those you disagree with and dislike.
Now this is funny! Pot calling kettle black.
Love this list! There is a Wrinkle in Time graphic novel out now, you know. :) You're welcome: commercial printing new jersey
Post a Comment
<< Home