Quote:
Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan
Dude. Stop gaming the numbers. You can't take the numbers from the end of the Hoover recession and compare them to the numbers during the worst year of the second Roosevelt recession and claim that the stuff in between never happened.
You're going to hurt something with that over-reaching there. In any case, the discussion is pointless. Your first claim was that my numbers didn't mean what I thought they did. Now you accept that they do, but claim that they're "wrong."
|
Umm no, I did not accept that. I pointed out that your numbers were far too rosy and untrue*. In that case, you would be pressed to come up with a new scheme explaining how exactly did FDR help the economy.
You hide behind the numbers* but you did not touch this point - real effects of new deal policies.
I wonder why is that? Care to explain how "allowing businesses in every industry to collude without the threat of antitrust prosecution and workers to demand salaries about 25 percent above where they ought to have been, given market forces" helped to speed up the recovery?
*I found this in Encyclopedia Brittanica, entry The great depression:
Althought there is some debate about the reliability of the statistics, it is widely agreed that the unemployment rate exceeded 20% at its highest points. Therefore I think it's fair to say that neither you nor I are able to dig out "true numbers," given the historians are unable to do so.