Newbies

Re: Could we be in the GDII?

ProudCapitalist — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 00:34:31 GMT

Of course we are in GDII!

But hopefully its consequences will not be as dramatic as those of the First Great Depression. First of all, we do have a generally higher standard of living now, so fewer will starv. And secondly, we've got the internet now. The "mass" of people is not today a victim of demagoges gathering mass meetings, nor a victim of uncritized government propaganda. Also, people are much less patriotic nowadays and hence less collectivisticly inclined. I surely hope that this means that all out war is much less likely now than it was after GDI. The proliferation of nuclear weapons too work as a peace keeper. Not even Obama would gain much by messing around with that kind of stuff.

You can find anything on the internet. The only problem is to find out what is true and what is false, but logically reasoning people contribute to clearing much that out. In the 1920s and 1930s information was much more centralized and easy to control. If government pushes forward with censoring and regulating the internet, then I would greatly increase prospects for fascism and world war. According to me, freedom of information is THE critical point for how our future will look like.

Re: Could we be in the GDII?

No2statism — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 20:52:39 GMT

Hoover discontinued Coolidge's efforts to reduce the size of government. It's a shame that Coolidge didn't stay another four years, but I'm sure he had his reasons.

It is correct to say that Hoover didn't do much, but it wasn't that he didn't allow for big enough govt--because he did. And that was exactly why he wasn't a great president.

It's just like some clueless people say that Bush let the free market run wild (the free market can't run wild--it would regulate itself, if individual liberty was restored), when in fact he did nothing to repeal Clinton's policies and any New Deal agencies; he simply took off where Clinton left off--like increasing the size of government, ramping up the occupation of Iraq. Clinton would never admit it, but Bush really continued Clinton's dream. And Obama's dream is that of Bush/Clinton. Unfortunately, Obama will never admit that either.

Re: Could we be in the GDII?

Jordan — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 20:04:35 GMT

Well, I wouldn't be so sure, my Macroecon professor "knows" that the GD would have been way worse without gov't intervention. We couldn't be patient and wait for the economy to self-correct like all those other horrible recessions we never hear about (2 of my professors have made claims that Hoover didn't do anything, one was an econ professor )

Anyway, I agree this could be long and terrible if gov't keeps doing what its doing, I almost wish they would do exactly what the Keynesian economists say, but they probably wouldn't even feel discredited after all the suffering.

Could we be in the GDII?

No2statism — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 17:45:45 GMT

I seem some striking similarities between the 1st GD and the mess the U.S. and the world is in now. We had a huge war back in the day; the Federal Reserve was as wreckless as ever before; we had a mortgage crisis; and we had a president elected to try to fix it by increasing govt spending and taxes.

Those 4 things have repeated themselves.

I don't know a whole lot about who defines a depression and how its defined [sub-question: so, how is it defined, and who does?], but still, does anyone else think that the government and the fed are lying and that we're really in a Great Depression?

I would say yes, because the Federal government doesn't want to look bad and because Bush kept on saying "good times are ahead" when nothing but bad times have come ever since (and before) he said that.