• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Generation Identity Ireland

Tadhg Gaelach

Donator
Premium Account
Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
25,201
Likes
21,876
Points
313
Certainly the 50's were better than today in the US. Everyone agrees on that.

Certainly that's true, but it took a world war for that to happen. In the 1950s, the USA had taken over the British Empire, lock stock and barrel and turned Western Europe and Japan into occupied territory. This meant huge transfers of wealth from the rest of the world to the USA. The USA has been living on those transfers ever since - though they began to fail in the mid 1970s.
 

Dan Óg

Ui Máine
Staff member
Donator
Premium Account
Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
9,757
Likes
4,448
Points
313
Exactly, when the introduced socialism here, it has been downhill ever since.We are all in agreement at long last.
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
1,107
Likes
904
Points
113
Exactly, when the introduced socialism here, it has been downhill ever since.We are all in agreement at long last.

We might all be in agreement that you lost your marbles a long time ago. The Great Depression might have played a part in the introduction of "socialism"and creation of the social security act 1935 and the new deal federal programs.
 
Last edited:

Dan Óg

Ui Máine
Staff member
Donator
Premium Account
Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
9,757
Likes
4,448
Points
313
We might all be in agreement that you lost your marbles a long time ago. The Great Depression might have played a part in the introduction of "socialism"and creation of the social security act 1935 and the new deal federal programs.
You got that right, that is why it lasted 11 years. LOL. Were it not for the war it would still be on.

You realize that it was Roosevelt who was president during the Depression
 

Dan Óg

Ui Máine
Staff member
Donator
Premium Account
Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
9,757
Likes
4,448
Points
313
I claim Roosevelt was President during the Depression, do you admit that. lol
 
Joined
Mar 17, 2016
Messages
5,001
Likes
7,350
Points
313
Location
The land of the golden potato
Yes, socialism has conquered the planet. It's succeeded via Roosevelt, it succeeded via Stalin. Hitler almost did with his small state. West Germany did very well with a strong social security architecture.

Meanwhile what have the conservatives been doin'?

Whilst they are *winning* "duhbates" on TV n' stuff, even the welfare-bum species of socialism has gone on and ousted them from the institutions without a bother, lol.

Conservative types really are out of their depth.
 

Dan Óg

Ui Máine
Staff member
Donator
Premium Account
Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
9,757
Likes
4,448
Points
313
Yes, socialism has conquered the planet. It's succeeded via Roosevelt, it succeeded via Stalin. Hitler almost did with his small state. West Germany did very well with a strong social security architecture.

Meanwhile what have the conservatives been doin'?

Whilst they are *winning* "duhbates" on TV n' stuff, even the welfare-bum species of socialism has gone on and ousted them from the institutions without a bother, lol.

Conservative types really are out of their depth.
I fully agree with you Spudster. I live in a complete socialist country here. Socialism for the lower classes and corporate socialism for the rich.

But the brainwashed thinks that this is capitalism
 
Joined
Mar 17, 2016
Messages
5,001
Likes
7,350
Points
313
Location
The land of the golden potato
I fully agree with you Spudster. I live in a complete socialist country here. Socialism for the lower classes and corporate socialism for the rich.

But the brainwashed thinks that this is capitalism
It is capitalism. You're not run by a politburo, shotcallers are bankers who preside over an oligarch of jostling special interests from the private sector.

What 'kawns typically don't understand is that mass industrialisation mandates socialism of one sort or another. I'll go further and insist that socialism and is a compulsory part of modern social existence. It's as inevitable as the moon in orbit, as essential as breathing is to man. In Europe, in America, everywhere that mass industrialised, urbanised living is a prominent feature of social existence.

That's why the projects of the Paul family will never succeed. Libertarian is just pie-in-the-sky stuff.
 

Dan Óg

Ui Máine
Staff member
Donator
Premium Account
Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
9,757
Likes
4,448
Points
313
, shotcallers are bankers who preside over an oligarch of jostling special interests from the private sector.

.
I fully agree with you, but the other posters believe that it is a free market capitalist system. Can you explain to them maybe.
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
1,107
Likes
904
Points
113
You got that right, that is why it lasted 11 years. LOL. Were it not for the war it would still be on.

You realize that it was Roosevelt who was president during the Depression
Your mental gymnastics are all over the place. I'm not an economist so I have to put this up.

8. That claim that the Depression was “prolonged” under Roosevelt from 1933 to 1937 (before Roosevelt’s turn to austerity) is nonsense. Under Roosevelt real GDP growth rates recovered to a very great extent.

Here is real GNP in billions of chained 2005 Dollars from U.S. Department of Commerce data:

Year | GNP* | Growth Rate
1929 | $984.60
1930 | $900.00 | -8.59%
1931 | $840.70 | -6.58%
1932 | $730.50 | -13.10%
1933 | $720.30 | -1.39%
1934 | $797.70 | 10.74%
1935 | $868.90 | 8.92%
1936 | $981.10 | 12.91%
1937 | $1032.50 | 5.23%
1938 | $997.40 | -3.39%
1939 | $1077.80 | 8.06%
1940 | $1170.80 | 8.62%
* Billions of chained 2005 Dollars
In reality, the average annual real GDP growth rate from 1934 to 1940 was 6.511%, the second highest average growth rate ever seen amongst all coherent and historically relevant periods in modern American history here.

We can see the very significant fall in unemployment under Roosevelt here. When Roosevelt turned to budget balancing and austerity in 1937–1938, the US plunged back into recession and sharply rising unemployment. This blatantly contradicts Austrian and libertarian myths about the benefits of austerity.

Your beloved Gilded Age was not all plain sailing either.

Social Democracy for the 21st Century: A Realist Alternative to the Modern Left: Search results for Great Depression
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
1,107
Likes
904
Points
113
Actually the worst of the Depression began in 1937.

Guess how long the Depression of 1920 lasted

Depression of 1920–21 - Wikipedia

Thank you FDR
Just the conclusion here.

In light of all this, the recession of 1920–1921 was very different from the contraction of 1929–1933 and various other pre-1914 recessions that were preceded by excessive private debt, and caused by bursting asset bubbles, severe financial crises, demand contractions and debt deflation.

An obvious example of such a 19th century depression was that of 1893-1895. This was set off by a financial crisis in 1893 and caused the US to suffer high involuntary unemployment throughout the 1890s, even after a technical recovery had begun in 1895 (on this depression, see Steeples and Whitten 1998; Akerlof and Shiller 2009: 59-64; Romer 1986: 31).


The belief that the recovery in 1921 proves that a laissez faire or “do nothing” policy will work in other cases of serious recession or depression is utter nonsense. Above all, the empirical data show that modern macroeconomic policies have reduced the durations of recessions after 1945. There is no reason why in principle the 1920–1921 recession could have been alleviated and brought to an end sooner if countercyclical fiscal policy had been used.
Social Democracy for the 21st Century: A Realist Alternative to the Modern Left: The US Recession of 1920–1921: Some Austrian Myths
 

Dan Óg

Ui Máine
Staff member
Donator
Premium Account
Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
9,757
Likes
4,448
Points
313
Just the conclusion here.

In light of all this, the recession of 1920–1921 was very different from the contraction of 1929–1933 and various other pre-1914 recessions that were preceded by excessive private debt, and caused by bursting asset bubbles, severe financial crises, demand contractions and debt deflation.

An obvious example of such a 19th century depression was that of 1893-1895. This was set off by a financial crisis in 1893 and caused the US to suffer high involuntary unemployment throughout the 1890s, even after a technical recovery had begun in 1895 (on this depression, see Steeples and Whitten 1998; Akerlof and Shiller 2009: 59-64; Romer 1986: 31).

The belief that the recovery in 1921 proves that a laissez faire or “do nothing” policy will work in other cases of serious recession or depression is utter nonsense. Above all, the empirical data show that modern macroeconomic policies have reduced the durations of recessions after 1945. There is no reason why in principle the 1920–1921 recession could have been alleviated and brought to an end sooner if countercyclical fiscal policy had been used.
Social Democracy for the 21st Century: A Realist Alternative to the Modern Left: The US Recession of 1920–1921: Some Austrian Myths
I stoped reading after the first sentence because I knew the writer was an idiot. The Depression did not end in 1933, it got worse and did not end til 1941.
 
Joined
Mar 17, 2016
Messages
5,001
Likes
7,350
Points
313
Location
The land of the golden potato
I fully agree with you, but the other posters believe that it is a free market capitalist system. Can you explain to them maybe.
Sure thing bro.

Alright guys n' gals gather around and listen good.

We've got two choices in this crazy, screwed up world.

1. The welfare bum/liberal socialism/monopoly capitalism that we've got to today. This is what I'll dub "Oprah Winfrey" socialism. It tries to pamper people at home whilst sending out some bizarre clown like "Hilary Clinton" to menace normal nations who refuse globalist lunacy. Trump's oily lot lizard Nikki Haley is a more "rightist" version of this exact species.

or.

2. Patriotic, dynamic socialism -- differing versions of which have been articulated and presented by James Connolly,:thumbsup: Nasser of Egypt :thumbsup: or the Prussian socialism of Oswald Spengler. :thumbsup:

Socialism - an inevitable part of the mass industrialised experience. Or to put it another way, it ain't going anywhere. Ever.

Oh, btw, words-to-the-wise -- If you ever see or hear of "free market" buzz words, you are either dealing with a con-artist seeking to expand the regime of monopoly capitalism (albeit a somewhat harder, jingoistic version of item 1 above) or some libertoon type who might as well be living on Mars given his tenuous attachment to most political realities here on earth.

That's all for today folks. Now go home and think about what happened here tonight.
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
1,107
Likes
904
Points
113
I stoped reading after the first sentence because I knew the writer was an idiot. The Depression did not end in 1933, it got worse and did not end til 1941.
Believe whatever you want.

The worst depressions were in Canada and the US, with Austria, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Germany, France and New Zealand following.

But, since different nations were affected in different ways and had different economic strengths and weaknesses, and took different policy responses, it makes little sense to invoke one nation whose depression ended early and compare it with the US, without a careful analysis of the extent of the depression and the policy response in both countries.


And there is another important issue here: is the “Great Depression” being defined as
(1) the actual period of real output collapse only, or

(2) the period of real output collapse and the recovery with high unemployment and insufficient growth to restore full employment which followed?
Stephen Davies asserts that in the UK the Great Depression “was over by 1933” (at 0.59–1.05). But in what sense?

If one defines the “Great Depression” in sense (1), then the Great Depression occurred from 1930–1931 in the UK and from 1929–1933 in the US.

But, in sense 2, the Great Depression continued in both the UK and the US (and in many other nations) until the late 1930s.



While the UK left the gold standard and devalued its currency quickly, which allowed some degree of export-led growth, its unemployment was still shockingly high in the 1930s without significant fiscal stimulus.

Stephen Davies asserts that the Great Depression in the US went on for more than a decade and in fact got worse by 1937. Without further clarification, this is misleading, because the US experienced a significant recovery from 1933 to 1936, and then Roosevelt turned to contractionay fiscal and monetary policy in 1937 and 1938 (the opposite of Keynesian fiscal policy!), and this caused the recession of 1937–1938 during which unemployment increased.

A final point is this: what nations emerged quickly from the depression in sense (2) to have a strong recovery where unemployment fell to low levels?

Social Democracy for the 21st Century: A Realist Alternative to the Modern Left: Search results for contraction of 1929–1933
 

Dan Óg

Ui Máine
Staff member
Donator
Premium Account
Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2015
Messages
9,757
Likes
4,448
Points
313
Believe whatever you want.

The worst depressions were in Canada and the US, with Austria, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Germany, France and New Zealand following.

But, since different nations were affected in different ways and had different economic strengths and weaknesses, and took different policy responses, it makes little sense to invoke one nation whose depression ended early and compare it with the US, without a careful analysis of the extent of the depression and the policy response in both countries.

And there is another important issue here: is the “Great Depression” being defined as

(1) the actual period of real output collapse only, or
(2) the period of real output collapse and the recovery with high unemployment and insufficient growth to restore full employment which followed?
Stephen Davies asserts that in the UK the Great Depression “was over by 1933” (at 0.59–1.05). But in what sense?

If one defines the “Great Depression” in sense (1), then the Great Depression occurred from 1930–1931 in the UK and from 1929–1933 in the US.

But, in sense 2, the Great Depression continued in both the UK and the US (and in many other nations) until the late 1930s.



While the UK left the gold standard and devalued its currency quickly, which allowed some degree of export-led growth, its unemployment was still shockingly high in the 1930s without significant fiscal stimulus.

Stephen Davies asserts that the Great Depression in the US went on for more than a decade and in fact got worse by 1937. Without further clarification, this is misleading, because the US experienced a significant recovery from 1933 to 1936, and then Roosevelt turned to contractionay fiscal and monetary policy in 1937 and 1938 (the opposite of Keynesian fiscal policy!), and this caused the recession of 1937–1938 during which unemployment increased.

A final point is this: what nations emerged quickly from the depression in sense (2) to have a strong recovery where unemployment fell to low levels?

Social Democracy for the 21st Century: A Realist Alternative to the Modern Left: Search results for contraction of 1929–1933
I believe we are talking about the US where the depression lasted til 1941 because of Roosevelt. Britain was lucky, they did not have the socialist fool FDR so maybe the Depression was over sooner there