Herbert Hoover

A forum to seperate the more serious discussions from the lighter topics in Off-topic.

Re: Herbert Hoover

Postby ruffdove » 25 Apr 2016, 13:37

musashisamurai wrote:It would be both.

Not to mention that many programs in the New Deal translated directly into the war effort. For example, the CCC (Civilian Conservation Corp) was busy doing various public works-great program, got many young men jobs as unskilled laborers. The organization was overseen by General MacArthur, with other Army officers involved, and although civilian, many alumni of the program went directly into the Army as corporals, alumni, while officers that otherwise would have had no command experience had a few years experience. Entire camps enlisted at once. Conscientious objctors during the war worked at some of the sites that weren't finished, while most sites were transferred to the Army/Navy, and some were used to house POWs.


Great points. In that case, HH deserves some credit too, for both the Hoover Dam and his ship building programs.
User avatar
ruffdove
 
Posts: 416
Joined: 28 Mar 2015, 04:32
Location: Mid-Atlantic, USA
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1515)
All-game rating: (1579)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Herbert Hoover

Postby JamesCook » 17 May 2016, 22:28

This is the best debate topic that I have ever read in the forum.
Member of The Classicists
JamesCook
 
Posts: 490
Joined: 12 Jun 2010, 19:05
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1392)
All-game rating: (1387)
Timezone: GMT-6

Re: Herbert Hoover

Postby steelfish » 03 Sep 2016, 22:48

I think that several in this thread are overstating the actions of Pres.Hoover during the depression. My own take on Hoover and the Great Depression is that he was not expecting the stock market crash of 1929 to be as severe and deeply felt that it was. The then current thought was that this was a passing recession. It wasn't until 1931 that politicians and economists realized that excessive speculation and a worldwide economic slowdown had tipped the American economy into a what would become known as the "Great Depression". Once again hindsight is perfect, while at the time there had been periodic recessions or economic slowdowns which eventually cured (corrected) themselves. No one was ready for a recession on a vast global scale. In 1931 Pres.Hoover in a letter to a friend (Gov. Emmerson of Illinois), "considerable continuance of destitution over the winter" and perhaps longer was unavoidable, Hoover as trying to "get the machinery of the country into action" through the creation of government agencies, encouraging labor harmony, and supporting local aid for public works. Pres.Hoover tried to foster cooperation between government and business in order to stabilize prices. His work focused on indirect relief from individual states and the private sector. The depression only deepened, so to get back to our teacher in the original post, it would appear that President Hoover did little to help. While President Hoover was working in the bakground to improve things and to get the "machinery of the country running again", publicly it looked like he was not doing much. Indeed some of the bills passed "Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act" actually worsened the by restricting international trade. By the end of his term, unemployment was at 25 percent in the US. There are in reality only three bills that were passed during President Hoover's term that were of any effectiveness, the "Federal Home Loan Bank Act" attempted to provide incentives for new home construction and addressed the struggling housing sector. The "Revenue Act of 1932" increased corporate and personal income taxes to unprecedented levels to fight the depression. The Hoover administration’s final attempt to stymie the Great Depression was the Emergency Relief and Construction Act, also signed in 1932. The Act provided government-backed loans to banks and created public works projects in the interest of increasing employment.
As far as naval shipbuilding goes the 1929 Cruiser program bill which had been passed called for 15 new cruisers to be built, by 1932 only funding for three cruisers had been allocated. Only the Pensacola would get launched in 1929, though it would not be commissioned until 1939. The New Orleans keel would not be laid down until 1931, disarmament talks started in London would keep all shipbuilding on hold until the end of 1930. This slowdown in naval shipbuilding was to cause layoffs in all the naval Yards, Brooklyn lost over a quarter of their workforce, the Washington Naval Gun Factory was reduced to a skeleton staff. Congress in 1931 passed another bill which authorized eleven new destroyers, however the money needed to build these ships was never appropriated.

President Hoover's failing is not that he didn't do anything, but what he did do was essentially too little and too late. He along with most other politicians and economists failed to recognized the scope and severity of the looming depression. All the conditions for making a global economic collapse met at once and no one could foresee what was going to happen. It would take a completely new approach and a new level of government involvement to ease the Great Depression. This set the stage for Roosevelt and the "New Deal" era.
steelfish
 
Posts: 776
Joined: 09 Mar 2011, 05:39
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1097)
All-game rating: (1099)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Herbert Hoover

Postby ruffdove » 10 Sep 2016, 02:44

"The "Revenue Act of 1932" increased corporate and personal income taxes to unprecedented levels to fight the depression."

Because raising taxes on those who would otherwise use their money to create jobs is a great way to fight unemployment.
:roll:
User avatar
ruffdove
 
Posts: 416
Joined: 28 Mar 2015, 04:32
Location: Mid-Atlantic, USA
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1515)
All-game rating: (1579)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Herbert Hoover

Postby steelfish » 11 Sep 2016, 22:02

ruffdove wrote:"The "Revenue Act of 1932" increased corporate and personal income taxes to unprecedented levels to fight the depression."

Because raising taxes on those who would otherwise use their money to create jobs is a great way to fight unemployment.
:roll:

What :o , this is all you got? A tired and universally disproved conservative myth that tax breaks create jobs and the inverse, "that raising taxes curbs growth and cuts jobs." You could not even bother to look up the "Revenue Act of 1932" to know what it even did before you reflexively and mistakenly had to chime in with the tired comment of "Because raising taxes on those who would otherwise use their money to create jobs is a great way to fight unemployment." If you are too lazy to even bother doing even some cursory research then how will you ever manage to stop coming off as an ignorant twit or fool. You could have even mentioned that the tax revenue act of 1932 came on the heels of the 1929 request by Hoover for the largest tax cut in history (at the time). Or you had said something like the 1932 revenue tax act was a result of the then current belief that in the "pre-Keynesian age, most policymakers -- including Hoover -- believed that deficits were an obstacle, not a means, to recovery."
Or you could have even said that the 1932 tax act laid the ground work for progressive income tax system that is still used today. Which in turn helped to create the largest middle class the world would every see under the presidencies of Roosevelt, Truman and Eisenhower.
You could have thoughtfully argued that the 1932 Revenue Act helped to deepen the Great Depression. Heck you have argued a lot of things thoughtfully and perhaps even eloquently, but no.............
You had to throw an opportunity to showcase your talents and intellect, but instead you decided to double down and continue to demonstrate to others that you are truly devoid of anything resembles intelligent thought or wit.
steelfish
 
Posts: 776
Joined: 09 Mar 2011, 05:39
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1097)
All-game rating: (1099)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Herbert Hoover

Postby Carebear » 12 Sep 2016, 01:14

ruffdove wrote:Because raising taxes on those who would otherwise use their money to create jobs is a great way to fight unemployment.
:roll:

This is one of the greatest lies ever told. Say it loud enough, often enough, and it becomes truth (not). This trickle-down theory has not been proved as a success.

There are only two ways to get governmental debt under control, reduce spending and increase taxes. Both need to be done.

There are many reasons why the wealthiest people are the right segment to be more heavily taxed. First and foremost, the economy is driven by consumption. The people who spend the highest percentage of their income on necessities are the ones that will benefit the economy the most by having more to spend. The lower and middle income segments are therefore the right people for lowered tax burdens.

Further, the wealthy have withstood much higher tax burdens in the past, during "golden ages" of growth too. They have the disposable income whereby they can withstand the increased tax burden.
You can have my last supply center, when you pry it from my cold dead hands.

Spam Ambassador Wannabe

Officially Sanctioned Site Gadfly (meaning the negative kind of sanction)
User avatar
Carebear
 
Posts: 2389
Joined: 12 Nov 2013, 04:26
Location: In the fingerhold
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1573)
All-game rating: (1589)
Timezone: GMT+8

Re: Herbert Hoover

Postby JamesCook » 01 Oct 2016, 19:06

This was the best Forum thread EVER until the last three posts were it went political with the conservative saying lower taxes and the liberals saying that is a false theory. Please go back to Hoover.
Member of The Classicists
JamesCook
 
Posts: 490
Joined: 12 Jun 2010, 19:05
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1392)
All-game rating: (1387)
Timezone: GMT-6

Re: Herbert Hoover

Postby JamesCook » 01 Oct 2016, 19:12

I have always thought that FDR gets too much credit for ending the depression and Hoover gets too much blame. Nothing either one did really had much effect. It was the totality of WWII which ended it.
Member of The Classicists
JamesCook
 
Posts: 490
Joined: 12 Jun 2010, 19:05
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1392)
All-game rating: (1387)
Timezone: GMT-6

Re: Herbert Hoover

Postby The O » 01 Oct 2016, 19:50

On what basis do you make this claim? Between 1933 and 1939, all economic indicators steadily got better. Granted, WWII is what really boosted the economy back into full swing. However, the efforts of FDR were real and felt nation wide. How convenient to just whitewash the extensive efforts of the FDR administration and the government as a whole. However, the activation of the government helped many people in the U.S. to ummm... I don't know... EAT.

If you have stats to support your assertion, please provide them. I just looked at the economic numbers on multiple websites and found that the New Deal actually was very effective in not only stemming the depression, but kickstarting the economy and employment. After all, how could there be that much public job creation and infrastructure developments and not have an effect on a collapsing economy.

At any rate, your assertion that FDR gets too much credit needs a lot of supporting arguments before it can be taken as true.
Thanks
User avatar
The O
 
Posts: 2353
Joined: 06 Dec 2008, 01:52
Location: Chicago
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 953
All-game rating: 885
Timezone: GMT-6

Re: Herbert Hoover

Postby I Love Italy » 01 Oct 2016, 23:54

The O wrote:On what basis do you make this claim? Between 1933 and 1939, all economic indicators steadily got better. Granted, WWII is what really boosted the economy back into full swing. However, the efforts of FDR were real and felt nation wide. How convenient to just whitewash the extensive efforts of the FDR administration and the government as a whole. However, the activation of the government helped many people in the U.S. to ummm... I don't know... EAT.

If you have stats to support your assertion, please provide them. I just looked at the economic numbers on multiple websites and found that the New Deal actually was very effective in not only stemming the depression, but kickstarting the economy and employment. After all, how could there be that much public job creation and infrastructure developments and not have an effect on a collapsing economy.

At any rate, your assertion that FDR gets too much credit needs a lot of supporting arguments before it can be taken as true.
Thanks


Also, even if FDR didn't end the Great Depression with his New Deal policies, they did make life much easier for millions of people in the mid to late 1930s, which is still a win in my book.
I have special eyes.
User avatar
I Love Italy
 
Posts: 2354
Joined: 31 Jul 2013, 23:08
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1041)
All-game rating: (1059)
Timezone: GMT-8

PreviousNext

Return to Debates

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests