This story was previously titled "Regarding the Stimulus - FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate"

Regarding the Stimulus - FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate »

Posted By pc25 1 month ago in News

1 of 1

FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years,

Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years.

"Why the Great Depression lasted so long has always been a great mystery, and because we never really knew the reason, we have always worried whether we would have another 10- to 15-year economic slump," said Ohanian, vice chair of UCLA's Department of Economics. "We found that a relapse isn't likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies."

Read Full Story at newsroom.ucla.edu »

188 Views Share Story 23 Comments Report

Submitted By:
pc25

studio engineer, studio musician, producer

Who Also Submitted:
Other Related Articles:

RSS Join the Discussion

+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 23 (view all)
- Display
  • 71%
    pc251 month ago

    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

    FTA

    "The fact that the Depression dragged on for years convinced generations of economists and policy-makers that capitalism could not be trusted to recover from depressions and that significant government intervention was required to achieve good outcomes," Cole said. "Ironically, our work shows that the recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened."

    -UCLA-

    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
    Reply

    6 Replies

    loading loading ...
  • 79%
    pc251 month ago

    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

    you have to love this cover in light of this

    http://img.timeinc.net/time/magazine/archive/cover...

    just goes to show you, the clueless, in the tank, Obama worshiping, enabling, MSM can't in 20/20 hindsight even get history right.

    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
    Reply
    loading loading ...
    • 65%
      alanocu1 month ago

      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

      Whose idea was it to give Democrats a bunch of our money to spend? I’m guessing FDR. If I ever ran into him, he’d be extra crippled. I guess I should also put Woodrow Wilson’s head through drywall to be fair.

      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
      Reply
      loading loading ...
      • 69%
        pc251 month ago

        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

        The first package worked so well they are talking about another one, to try to fix the damage the first one did.....

        http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=33926

        As Democrats consider another round of so-called stimulus spending, Republicans on the House Committee on Ways and Means have compiled a stark assessment of the job losses since the first one began, measured by President Obama’s own set of rosy predictions of jobs “created or saved” in the earlier stages of his spending spree.

        Back in February, while framing the argument in favor of passage of the “stimulus” bill, the White House released its state-by-state estimates (pdf) on the impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act a.k.a. the “stimulus” spending bill. The report promised 3.5 million jobs “saved or created” -- 90 percent in the private sector.

        Yet the Department of Labor’s own payroll employment data through August 2009 (the latest available) reflects that America continues to bleed jobs at a colossal rate. Only one area of the country has actually come close to surpassing only half of the estimate put forth by the president: Washington, D.C.

        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
        Reply
        loading loading ...
        • 63%
          alanocu1 month ago

          This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

          Politicians need to keep their hands off of our money. They should be able to send out the military to destroy other countries — things we don’t care about — but they need to keep their hands off our damn money.

          (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
          Reply
          loading loading ...
          • 69%
            Klarissa1 month ago

            This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

            is the cash for refrigerators still on?? Haven't heard anything about it.

            (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
            Reply
            loading loading ...
            • 100%
              truthiness1 month ago

              This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

              it is probable that the cycle of crash to boom would have turned faster without FDR's policies. However, the amount of human suffering during the crash cycle would have been greatly increased, which was what FDR was working to avoid, more so than helping big business. There also would have been far greater instability in the market in the years following FDR's admin if not for the managed economy. This is why Nixon said, "We're all Keynesians now."

              (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
              Reply
              loading loading ...
              • 67%
                Justice4All1 month ago

                This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

                Wow, two economists finally agree on something and this is the best they can come up with?

                (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
                Reply

                1 Reply

                loading loading ...
              • 75%
                stephen-johnson1 month ago

                This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

                "We found that a relapse isn't likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies."

                Let's hope that history doesn't repeat itself. We don't want a world war to pull us out of this mess.

                (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
                Reply

                3 Replies

                loading loading ...
              • 58%
                Wolfie20071 month ago

                This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

                Considering this and Obama's policies thus far I think we should batten down the hatches and plan on 20 to 30 years of Obama's "recession".

                (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
                Reply
                loading loading ...
                • 80%
                  Striker1011 month ago

                  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

                  by Henry Hazlitt "Economics in One Lesson" first copyrighted 1946, clearly explained the negative effects of minimum and union manipulated wages, price controls and other manipulations. Hazlitt discussed the effects without specifically targeting FDR's attempts at manipulation, yet stated the effects which has taken 2 UCLA economic researchers all these years to "rediscover".

                  A high-school class of econ001 using this as course textbook would save many people from such unreasoned mistakes. People like Droppers bubba2 DenCuddy Mystic_Moldovan and fiftynine.

                  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
                  Reply
                  loading loading ...
                  • 100%
                    engineer1 month ago

                    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

                    http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090101_fdr_p...

                    FTA

                    "According to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, “Only with the New Deal’s rehabilitation of the financial system in 1933-35 did the economy begin its slow emergence from the Great Depression.” In fact, even famed conservative economist Milton Friedman admitted that the New Deal’s Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. was “the structural change most conducive to monetary stability since ... the Civil War.”

                    OK—if the verifiable evidence proves the New Deal did not prolong the Depression, what about historians—do they “pretty much agree” on the opposite?

                    Again, no.

                    As Newsweek’s Daniel Gross reports, “One would be very hard-pressed to find a serious professional historian who believes that the New Deal prolonged the Depression.”"

                    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
                    Reply
                    loading loading ...
                    • 100%
                      canadianrancher571 month ago

                      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

                      First of all I don't have much use for economists, and the article dealt with some of the policies of the new deal but likely missed out on some of them. When it comes to government stimulus I can't say that I'm 100 percent against them as long as they show a net gain to the country. Some of FDR's policies did aid the country and may not in the short term looked beneficial, The building of roads and infrastructure aided the country by opening the country up to transportation which was a long term effect. when these economists looked at growth did they maybe factor in things like the benefits that where gained by the economy from some of the government spending. If the economy had to spend money out of the gain in production would of the gains been as large and would some of the projects even been attempted at all.
                      To me the biggest problem with FDR's stimulus idea has more to do with the acceptance by politicians and society that government must come to the aid of the economy or even to the aid of certain sectors of the economy during corrections.
                      As for the present round of stimulus ideas, I'm not in favor of any of them, the bank and auto bailouts rewarded poor management, the cash for clunkers idea was just another bailout, and so far most ideas are not going to ever show a net gain to the country.

                      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 2) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 3)
                      Reply
                      loading loading ...
                      View All 23 Comments

                      Add a Comment

                      Sign In With Your Propeller Account

                      Forgot your password?

                      Please keep your comments relevant to this story.

                      To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.

                      More News