Re: The federal Government program that amazingly reduced poverty by 22 percent in only 15 years
posted at 1/10/2014 4:09 PM EST
In response to StalkingButler's comment:
Further to that point Amy Shales isn't an economist and she admits as much, she has said on numerous occaisions that her book doesn't point to any alternatives to the new deal because she simply has no idea what would have worked.
Amity is a historian, and a well respected one at that. Beyond that, we know that the New Deal didn't work, just like the stimulus hasn't worked. The only things that these programs do is put off the pain for a while, they don't solve anything.
Actually you don't know that it didn't work because defining success is not a binary choice between only two choices. The fact is the new deal did bring relief to a ravaged economy, and even Amity
Shales, again the author of the book you brought into this had this to say about the very claim you just made:
Fans of the book’s political applications might also take note that Shlaes herself stops short of asserting that a laissez-faire approach would have been more successful than the one Franklin D. Roosevelt took.
“We don’t know — because we weren’t there — what would have happened if they had left the market alone,” she said. Or, as she puts it in the book, “Of course Hoover and Roosevelt may have had no choice but to pursue the policies they did. They may indeed have spared the country something worse — an American version of Stalin’s communism or Mussolini’s fascism.”
As for the stimulus, broad consensus already exists among economists that the various programs saved or created well over 2 million jobs, so lets not start with the empty headed sloganeering.