An Interesting Read

Message 254 of 5294

Economists are famously portrayed as having more than two hands because of their tendency to answer every question with " on the one hand blah, blah , blah ---while on the other hand more blah , blah , blah ---- while on the other hand , even more blah , blah , blah " , with the points made by each hand tending to contradict the others . Thus , is it any wonder that they are STILL debating the handling of the Great depression by both Hoover and FDR , more than 70 years after the fact ? A link to the article is in first reply .

posted by Dirck

Replies 1 - 10 of 22

1 2 3 Next »

view link . There is a lot of very interesting information here , especially about the rule of unintended consequences , which seems to hold true in almost every government action . No doubt the current government policies will continue to be debated long after the USA has either defaulted on its massive debt or allowed rampant inflation to wipe out that debt , along with the lifesavings of every American .

posted by Dirck
about 1 month ago

I tried to read the article, but got an immediate headache.

Let me take something for the pain, look up some statistics and then I'll get back to the Rupert Murdock propaganda machine.

posted by Lollykoko
about 1 month ago

~SMILE~

posted by Charles1950
about 1 month ago

The problem with the Dreary Science is that it seems that it is not “one hand or the other” not either/or, but several hands that might apply. I admit I’m not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but economics and economists drive me nuts.

posted by Ioruach
about 1 month ago

Made sense to me, I always hated economics….

posted by denjolly
about 1 month ago

It's all well and good when you compare apples to apples and plums to plums.

When you compare apples to plums, plums to kiwi, kiwi to grapes and throw in bananas, you have fruit salad.

posted by Lollykoko
about 1 month ago

True but back then farmers where throwing away their milk, and crops because of the government regulation…No markets!

posted by denjolly
about 1 month ago

No, Den. Back then farmers were selling their crops to the government who paid someone to process them so they could be handed out to the less fortunate as "Commodity Foods."

Back before food stamps made sugar sweetened cereal available to every poor household in the nation. Before Agri-business became a household word and mono-culture farming infected the world.

posted by Lollykoko
about 1 month ago

Lots of folks back then did as I said, just because of that government program, you mentioned…The government paid them less for, what it cost to produce…

posted by denjolly
about 1 month ago

I'll admit, I didn't know any farmers back then. The girlfriend that grew up on a farm said her dad sold the place when Reagan was elected. But here is a history of the Commodity foods/Food Stamp program as it has changed over the years. view link

Perhaps I'm too old fashioned. Back then I had to go pick up actual food at the clearing house and take it home and cook it. There were no boxes of triple sugar cardboard flakes. You had to choose from oats, rice, cornmeal and maybe cream of wheat. Six year old Junior wasn't ripping open toaster pastries and heating them up to add frosting. Ten year old Suzie wasn't nuking freezer burritos to eat in front of the game machine.

posted by Lollykoko
about 1 month ago

Replies 1 - 10 of 22

1 2 3 Next »