<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Things We Read Today: Hurley and the Great Depression</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.wholesomereading.com/2010/05/16/things-we-read-today-hurley-and-the-great-depression/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.wholesomereading.com/2010/05/16/things-we-read-today-hurley-and-the-great-depression/</link>
	<description>Musings on culture and politics by baseball writer Steven Goldman</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 19 May 2012 11:27:25 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Shaun P.</title>
		<link>http://www.wholesomereading.com/2010/05/16/things-we-read-today-hurley-and-the-great-depression/#comment-2489</link>
		<dc:creator>Shaun P.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 May 2010 14:08:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wholesomereading.com/?p=863#comment-2489</guid>
		<description>"Harding succeeded where FDR failed miserably."

I'm sorry, that gave me a very hearty chortle, which is a wonderful thing on a Monday morning, and so I thank you for it.  But holy smokes, are you serious?  I'm trying to understand exactly how you can arrive at that conclusion, and even accepting your points as true - I don't buy the picture you're painting with them, it leaves out just a wee bit of important details I believe - I'm having trouble with it.  At the very least, it suggests that three generations of historians and scholars are completely wrong about at least two, and possibly four, Presidents and their economic policies . . . and I have a very hard time accepting that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Harding succeeded where FDR failed miserably.&#8221;</p>
<p>I&#8217;m sorry, that gave me a very hearty chortle, which is a wonderful thing on a Monday morning, and so I thank you for it.  But holy smokes, are you serious?  I&#8217;m trying to understand exactly how you can arrive at that conclusion, and even accepting your points as true - I don&#8217;t buy the picture you&#8217;re painting with them, it leaves out just a wee bit of important details I believe - I&#8217;m having trouble with it.  At the very least, it suggests that three generations of historians and scholars are completely wrong about at least two, and possibly four, Presidents and their economic policies . . . and I have a very hard time accepting that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ConstitutionNotRevolution</title>
		<link>http://www.wholesomereading.com/2010/05/16/things-we-read-today-hurley-and-the-great-depression/#comment-2488</link>
		<dc:creator>ConstitutionNotRevolution</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 May 2010 13:26:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wholesomereading.com/?p=863#comment-2488</guid>
		<description>Steven,

Learn history.

Look up the Depression of 1920. In some ways it was as bad or worse than "The Great Depression." Unemployment went from 4% to 12%. GDP dropped 17%. Secretary of Commerce and Progressive Republican Herbert Hoover recommended government intervention a la Keynesian "fiscal stimulus" but Harding ignored him.

Instead, Harding cut government spending by 50% and taxes were slashed similarly. Also, the Federal Reserve stayed out of the problem almost completely. The result was the unemployment rate dropping to under 7% in 1921 and to 2.8% by 1923. The total federal deficit was also eeduced by 1/3.

Hoover did go on to some fame, however. He helped pass the Smoot-Hawley Act which was one of the major causes of (or worsened) the Great Depression. You seem to be implying that FDR brought us out of the GD, yet we were still in it at the advent of WWII. 

Harding succeeded where FDR failed miserably.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Steven,</p>
<p>Learn history.</p>
<p>Look up the Depression of 1920. In some ways it was as bad or worse than &#8220;The Great Depression.&#8221; Unemployment went from 4% to 12%. GDP dropped 17%. Secretary of Commerce and Progressive Republican Herbert Hoover recommended government intervention a la Keynesian &#8220;fiscal stimulus&#8221; but Harding ignored him.</p>
<p>Instead, Harding cut government spending by 50% and taxes were slashed similarly. Also, the Federal Reserve stayed out of the problem almost completely. The result was the unemployment rate dropping to under 7% in 1921 and to 2.8% by 1923. The total federal deficit was also eeduced by 1/3.</p>
<p>Hoover did go on to some fame, however. He helped pass the Smoot-Hawley Act which was one of the major causes of (or worsened) the Great Depression. You seem to be implying that FDR brought us out of the GD, yet we were still in it at the advent of WWII. </p>
<p>Harding succeeded where FDR failed miserably.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David in Cal</title>
		<link>http://www.wholesomereading.com/2010/05/16/things-we-read-today-hurley-and-the-great-depression/#comment-2481</link>
		<dc:creator>David in Cal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 May 2010 17:42:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wholesomereading.com/?p=863#comment-2481</guid>
		<description>I gather that Steven's point is that much of FDR's major legislation was effective in early 1933.   Nevertheless, the Federal Government also did a lot before that date.  

E.g., the Smoot Hawley tariff (which most economists today believe made things worse) was passed in 1930.  

FDR is famous for what he accomplished in his first 100 days: the Bank Holiday, the Emergency Banking Bill (which strengthened, reorganized and reopened the most solvent banks), the creation of the Federal Emergency Relief Administration, the Civilian Conservation Corps, the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, and the Tennessee Valley Authority. Congress also gave the Federal Trade Commission broad new regulatory powers, and provided mortgage relief to millions of farmers and homeowners. (from wikipedia)

History shows that this early package of actions didn't end the Depression.  Neither did the group of bills passed 3.5 years later.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I gather that Steven&#8217;s point is that much of FDR&#8217;s major legislation was effective in early 1933.   Nevertheless, the Federal Government also did a lot before that date.  </p>
<p>E.g., the Smoot Hawley tariff (which most economists today believe made things worse) was passed in 1930.  </p>
<p>FDR is famous for what he accomplished in his first 100 days: the Bank Holiday, the Emergency Banking Bill (which strengthened, reorganized and reopened the most solvent banks), the creation of the Federal Emergency Relief Administration, the Civilian Conservation Corps, the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, and the Tennessee Valley Authority. Congress also gave the Federal Trade Commission broad new regulatory powers, and provided mortgage relief to millions of farmers and homeowners. (from wikipedia)</p>
<p>History shows that this early package of actions didn&#8217;t end the Depression.  Neither did the group of bills passed 3.5 years later.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

