I agree they really screwed up what could have been a great design with the Sac. I saw about 5 final drawings for the obverse and 5 for the reverse - it sure seemed like they picked the worst 2 to me. Just about every alternate design idea I saw was superior.
There have been a couple of votes for the SBA dollar as the worst. It's a bad design, but has historical relevance. (The moon on the reverse especially never made sense to me.)
I remember when the SBA were first released and schools started teaching about Anthony and the women's suffrage movement. From what I understand, Anthony was chosen in part because she staunchly opposed Margaret Sanger and others' efforts to make birth control and abortion available to women, which made Anthony a palatable choice to the Reagan administration.
Aside from that, Anthony was on the Board of Lady Managers at the 1892 Columbian Exposition, where she was the driving force behind the issuance of the Isabella quarter. In that respect it made sense to honor Anthony for her contribution to American coinage.
Well, here are some of the finalists. The profile of Sacagawea on the obverse is the best IMO and just about anything I've seen beats the reverse they picked. Some of the reverses on that page are nice looking - how the heck did they manage to pick the ugliest one?
This doesn't includes dozens of other suggestions or submissions, including our own Daniel Carr's (board member) designs.
<< <i>Way too harsh on Roosevelt, get real. Economic ideas had run out, Laise-faire capitalism had COMPLETELY, 100%, FAILED with the Great Depression and millions were hungry and umemployed. Darn right he started government work programs, Social Security, etc. Our system is much better off today WITH these ideas then WITHOUT these ideas. The question is one of how extreme you take things, and Roosevelt is not responsible for what future Congresses and Presidents did with his ideas. >>
You, unfortunately like most american's, don't really understand what the depression was about. I'm not trying to be offensive toward you either, so don't take it that way. So, let me give you the cliff notes version of what happened. There were many depressions in the US prior to the "great depression", 1873, 1893 and 1907 for instance. Why didn't they last like the 1929 depression? It wasn't because of the failure of laise-faire capitalism. In fact, it was laise-faire capitalism that kept the prior depressions from becoming a "great depression" With the advent of the Federal Reserve system in 1914, the money supply was effectively, and practically, controlled by the government. Roosevelt did several things to exacerbate the depression (hoover wasn't much better). One of the things he did was SHRINK the money supply by having the fed INCREASE insterest rates. As you can imagine, that snuffed out ANY hope of a quick recovery. He also increased the cost of labor by passing minumum wage laws, which kept companies from hiring new workers. Those are just two of the reasons that the depression lasted until 1941 but there are many more. You really need to become more well versed on history and fundamental economics before you say cliched things like "Laise-faire capitalism had COMPLETELY, 100%, FAILED" It was the trying of the new government controls that failed, not capitalism. Notice how the government LOWERS interest rates now during a recession. No one seems to realize it's because RAISING it was tried and failed.
<< <i>Roosevelt is the worst. On the "ideas" of America and liberty he and his clan were statist, big government socialists >>
Somewhat true, then again we see how sorely Hoover's fiscally conservative politics exacerbated the problem. Don't get me wrong: I'm a social and fiscal conservative. But when in the most extreme possible situations (such as the Great Depression and the World War that followed on its heels), extraordinary measures are needed. It's an accepted fact that government spending stimulates the economy, and that's just what FDR did (or tried to do). We conservatives would prefer (nowdays) to give people tax cuts rather than tax increases and increased spending, but any economist will tell you the government spending multiplier is slightly larger than the tax cut multiplier; that is, increased government spending helps the economy more than tax cuts. The reason many (including myself) prefer tax cuts is idealistic, not pragmatic.
We should just count ourselves fortunate that Huey Pierce Long got himself shot before he had the chance to become president. That 100% tax on all earnings over 100k per year would have been unreal--and truly socialist. In short, I agree that in a minor depression or recession FDR would have been a nut to do what he did, but in a time when only extreme measures could help, FDR did his best.
I heard they were making a French version of Medal of Honor. I wonder how many hotkeys it'll have for "surrender."
Kennedy. Lets face it, he did nothing. He was a womanizer that won the hearts of Americans. If he was not assisinated, he would have never been thought of for a coin.
For all the liberal who are tempted to respond, by today's standards, based on his policies Kennedy would be a Republican today.
GottaGetCoins
Currently attempting the 12 Coin US Gold Type Set and the 20th Century US Major Coin Type Set. Completed a Franklin Half Proof Set.
<< <i>Roosevelt is the worst. On the "ideas" of America and liberty he and his clan were statist, big government socialists >>
Somewhat true, then again we see how sorely Hoover's fiscally conservative politics exacerbated the problem. Don't get me wrong: I'm a social and fiscal conservative. But when in the most extreme possible situations (such as the Great Depression and the World War that followed on its heels), extraordinary measures are needed. It's an accepted fact that government spending stimulates the economy, and that's just what FDR did (or tried to do). We conservatives would prefer (nowdays) to give people tax cuts rather than tax increases and increased spending, but any economist will tell you the government spending multiplier is slightly larger than the tax cut multiplier; that is, increased government spending helps the economy more than tax cuts. The reason many (including myself) prefer tax cuts is idealistic, not pragmatic.
We should just count ourselves fortunate that Huey Pierce Long got himself shot before he had the chance to become president. That 100% tax on all earnings over 100k per year would have been unreal--and truly socialist. In short, I agree that in a minor depression or recession FDR would have been a nut to do what he did, but in a time when only extreme measures could help, FDR did his best. >>
You guys are killing me. Hoover didn't have fiscally conservative policies. He was FDR light. He raised fed interest rates and came up with several new deal style work programs etc. etc. He, along with FDR, set in motion policies that created the "great depression" Had they not interfered, it would have been another recession such as the 1907 1893 etc. In spite of what had been done, we were actually coming out of the depression in 1934 until FDR's new deal started to kick in. Also, the government spending stuff is not accurate either. The ONLY way government stimulates the economy is by INCREASING the money supply. What they spend is a function of what we owe, i.e. the budget deficit, and is counterproductive to a healthy economy. If government spending helped the economy, then all the banana republics wouldn't have to devalue their currency and declare bankruptcy every 10-15 years. Really, you guys are killing me.........
Baccaruda, you're right about the Sac designs. The profile would have been the best choice for the obverse. I think the design started to go wrong when they settled on Sacagawea as the subject.
The ONLY way government stimulates the economy is by INCREASING the money supply. What they spend is a function of what we owe, i.e. the budget deficit, and is counterproductive to a healthy economy. If government spending helped the economy, then all the banana republics wouldn't have to devalue their currency and declare bankruptcy every 10-15 years. Really, you guys are killing me.........
Hmmm - judging by your sig picture, they already did!
When the government spends a dollar, where does it go? It floats thru the economy and the government ends up getting most of it back in taxes. But in the meantime, it puts people to work.
And it seems to me that what we owe is a function of what we spend, not the other way around.
slabed world trade center death coins - you can surely figure out why
The question was "What coin most poorly illustrates America?", not "What plastic most poorly illustrates America. Surely, Dorkkarl, you should be the last one making that mistake!
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
The US coin which most poorly illustrates America is the Ethel Kennedy Special Olympics commem.
Whew, could they put an uglier person on a coin? >>
According to much of the world, we are known as "ugly Amercians" so ironically the Eunice (not Ethel) Kennedy Shriver commemorative may very accurately represent this country and our wealth. Eunice's husband helped establish the Peace Corps, which tries to counter the "ugly American image".
I agree that this is the ugliest portrait I have seen on a U.S. coin since Robert Scot's Matron Head large cents of 1816-1835. However, the question was which coin most poorly illustrates America and why.
My votes are for either the coins that represent nothing (3 cent silver or Shield Nickel) or perhaps the Washington/Carver commemorative half dollar, authorized "to oppose the spread of communism amongst American negroes".
A much tougher question, perhaps for another thread, is what coin Best illustrates America and why? My vote is for the Bridgeport commem. I'll tell you why if someone starts that other thread and keeps it focused on coins.
"Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity" - Hanlon's Razor
"It's an accepted fact that government spending stimulates the economy,..." --ddink
So we can extrapolate that the more the government spends, the better and stronger is the economy.
So why not have the government do ALL it can to help the economy, and raise taxes to 100%. In fact, we should also allow the government to own 100% of everything, because surely the government would be positioned to make the most efficient and fair decisions across the board.
Isn't socialism great?!!!
.....GOD
"Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." -Luke 11:9
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." -Deut. 6:4-5
"For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; He will save us." -Isaiah 33:22
Personally, I find it very un-American to have any presidents on the coins; George Washington himself was very opposed to this idea of trying to be like the other "civilized" countries of the world.
I find it particularly detestable that we should glorify a president who did so much to undermine American freedom and Americanism in general, and I'm referring to none other than FDR. How can we say it was right of him to nationalize (steal) all the gold immediately upon taking office? And how about implementing all possible socialist/communist policies he could? And then packing the Supreme Court in order to get his way when those ideas were disallowed? And running for his third term in office? And going against his campaign promises of staying out of the war? And then nationalizing production of the whole nation during the war? And getting America involved into more "foreign entanglements" that to this day dictate practically every move we make?
Anyway, you get my drift. I also don't feel Lincoln is the best one to glorify either.
.....GOD
"Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." -Luke 11:9
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." -Deut. 6:4-5
"For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; He will save us." -Isaiah 33:22
So why not have the government do ALL it can to help the economy, and raise taxes to 100%. In fact, we should also allow the government to own 100% of everything, because surely the government would be positioned to make the most efficient and fair decisions across the board.
Isn't socialism great?!!!
>>
Well yes I mean after all, why should you be so selfish to think you should work your butt off for your family and your own interests. I mean, think of the greater good like mr roosevelt and the rest of the politician sleaze would say.
The IRS is dispatching their people right now to SE Asia ( if you'd like to see the link I'll be happy to provide it, it's on thaivisa.com) to make sure that all those evil Americans who have tossed their chips in and are living on foreign soil pay taxes on any income they might be deriving from their food stands or whatever else they are doing as expats in exotic places. How dare those people try to get away!
The Vietnamese government ( communist you know) just "lowered" the tax rate and now the maximum is at 40%, while foreign investors are given tax free status up too 15 years ( gee I wonder why).
Think of the greater good. I mean cmon, are you some kind of extremist?
Interesting how it's impossible to NOT mix historical facts with our coinage, and how few people who claim to be involved in Numismatics even have a clue of these facts.
To really study Numismatics, you have to be drawn to the truths about history.
I thought there was an exemption of $75K/yr for Americans living overseas.
But it's more insidious that according to the bureaucrats, even if you disavow your American citizenship, you'll still be hounded into eternity for American taxes. So that makes Americans slaves to the state. Now let's not get into all the executive orders that codify that very state of slavery.
.....GOD
"Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." -Luke 11:9
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." -Deut. 6:4-5
"For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; He will save us." -Isaiah 33:22
<< <i>I thought there was an exemption of $75K/yr for Americans living overseas.
But it's more insidious that according to the bureaucrats, even if you disavow your American citizenship, you'll still be hounded into eternity for American taxes. So that makes Americans slaves to the state. Now let's not get into all the executive orders that codify that very state of slavery.
Well that supposedly is true however why then would they be dispatching the tax troops to SE Asia? Then there is the issue of the "ex-patriot" tax which the previous administration proposed ( not sure if it was signed or not although I think it has been which would make sense considering the dispatching of said troops. It means that say you've had it and have decided to leave and live on an island in the south pacific ( or whatever), you are obligated to pay the government an "exit" tax or ex-patriot tax amounting to as much as half your stack.
Like a financial berlin wall.
Yes it is slavery. And yes it did start with Lincoln although I was reluctant to go there as well.
Roosevelt is the worst with respect to American Ideals?
This is a free country and you are entitled to write what you believe but just remember who was the key political figure in the World that was instrumental in leading the fight to defeat Fascism so that today you still have the right to think and write what you believe.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>Roosevelt is the worst with respect to American Ideals?
This is a free country and you are entitled to write what you believe but just remember who was the key political figure in the World that was instrumental in leading the fight to defeat Fascism so that today you still have the right to think and write what you believe. >>
would you please define for me what "your" rendition" of the american idea was then? Maybe those of us who think that Freedom was the primary ideal and what the American revolution was fought for, are confused.
Maybe people like you are right, that socialism is a really good thing and that we should all be slaves to the government. I'd just like to hear it from you. How bout it huh?
I think the point is that whether we agree with Roosevelt's politics or not he was instrumental in prosecuting a war against the most dangerous enemies this coun- try has ever fought. Whether we believe his policies alleviated or exascerbated the most serious economic crisis this country has ever seen, he still led the country and still maintained his courage and integrity.
Say what you will about the man but he did what he thought was right. Unless some- one is eating babies there is value and humanity in this.
Is this really the proper forum for such discussion?
<< <i>Perhaps the time has come for this thread to be moved to the open forum in light of the political content.
Freedom certainly includes the right of free speech.
My comments did not involve socialism or people being slaves to government. >>
You can move anywhere you like or would you advocate force in which to ply your "thoughts"?. You chose to type your thoughts here and it would be a good idea for you to try to internalize what the thread was about before making your retreat.
It has everything to do with the "idea" of America and since you are a strong advocate or apologist for a man whose idea was to circumvent the Constitution with his brand of socialism, you have no standing to even use the word Freedom in the context of the thread.
The Nickel Three Cent Piece has never done much for me. It looks like a foreign coin, and the design is dull.
The Shield nickel might be next. Back in the '60's one critic said it looked like a tombstone, and I don't that was far from wrong.
Among the modern coins, the SBA dollar was ugly and was issued for totaly PC reasons. The Sackie is more attractive, but also PC big time.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
Maybe people like you are right, that socialism is a really good thing and that we should all be slaves to the government. I'd just like to hear it from you. How bout it huh?
Socialists? Of course we are to a degree. Pure capitalism can be pretty unforgiving. There are those in our society who through no fault of their own lack the ability to provide for themselves or their children. Child labor laws were a response to pure capitalism. Pure capitalism has it's own fatal flaw. Any system in which a handful of individuals can gain absolute control of the population of a nation without consent precipitates revolution. Libertarians who long for such a system often fail to realize why it isn't our chosen goal. The original vision for this nation was that of a republic in which the landowners were the only ones allowed to vote. That didn't last long either.
The personalities of this world can be divided into two camps, artists and critics. When viewed through the lens of historical perspective, perhaps President Roosevelt chose the wrong path to financial recovery, but he did manage to be elected to the presidency several times. To those who are his detractors, I'll ask that you examine and compare your own accomplishments and see which camp you belong in, and why the readership should give more credence to your philosophy than his accomplishments.
MrEarlygold, have you read Conrad Black's book "Champion of Freedom"? It offers a slightly different perspective than "FDR's Folly". The following is a quote from a reviewer that does a good job of summarizing FDR's accomplishments.
"Black's contention that FDR was not merely the 20th Century's greatest American President, but the most important person of the 20th Century--period. He bases this on seven key accomplishments:1) FDR was, alongside Churchill, the co-savior of Western Civilization during its darkest hour.2) FDR ended American isolation and permanently engaged America in Europe and the Far East. Roosevelt, an anti-colonialist since his school days, predicted the crack-up of the British Empire. Decades before the fact, he foresaw China's emergence as a major power, and the Middle East as a potential source of trouble. 3) Roosevelt reinvented the Federal Government's relationship to the people, reviving the economy and rescuing capitalism without resorting to the Fascistic and Socialistic extremes of other countries. Despite the contentions in the recently published "FDR's Folly," Roosevelt did indeed revive the domestic economy, reducing unemployment from over 30% in 1933 to about 7% by 1939. On top of the economic improvements, FDR's "workfare" programs resulted in the creation of an infrastructure in use to this day: The Golden Gate and Bay Bridges, Hoover Dam, the Tennessee Valley Authority--which brought electricity to millions of rural citizens, and countless smaller projects.4) FDR was an almost uniformly successful war leader, moreso than Washington, Madison, Lincoln, or Wilson. He chose the right people to carry out his war aims--Marshall, Nimitz, MacArthur, and Eisenhower--and the few times he overrode their objections (insisting on giving the defeat of Germany top priority and authorizing Doolittle's raid on Tokyo) the results were favorable for the Allies. Despite the disaster at Pearl Harbor (for which Black rightly lays blame at the local commanders' feet) the Americans prosecuted World War II with remarkably few defeats. Under FDR, America produced unimaginable amounts of war material which sped victory on all fronts, all while America endured the least number of war casualties among Allied nations.5) Shattering the Yalta Myth, Black contends and convinces that Roosevelt created the circumstances which allowed his predecessors--from Truman through Clinton--to complete the Wilsonian objective and make the world truly safe for democracy. Indeed, Europe as it exists today is very much as Roosevelt envisioned it. Sadly, if Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson had studied his views on the Far East, the Vietnam war would have likely been avoided. The use of the United Nations to prosecute the First Gulf War and to harmlessly vent tensions between nations--as in the Cuban Missile Crisis--was again as FDR intended. But Black also points out that Roosevelt would be appalled at how the UN has degenerated in the last decade into a platform for America bashing.6) FDR was unmatched in his sheer political brilliance and mastery of the varied moods of the American electorate. He knew when to push forward, when to pull back, and when to slacken the reigns of power. His clairvoyance extended to the politics of other nations, and had Churchill followed his political advice, the Prime Minister likely would not have been dumped by the British electorate mere weeks after victory over Germany.7) Not least, by his triumph over Polio (although recently a theory has surfaced that he actually may have been stricken with Guillian-Barre) Franklin Roosevelt was then, and remains today, a symbol of inspiration for all those faced with seemingly insurmountable odds."
President Roosevelt is portrayed on the dime because of his association with the "March of Dimes". Just the kind of guy we'd all like to vilify. It's likely those that rail against the socialist leanings of the government have just done their taxes.
Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
Pure Capitalism is a great idea on paper. So are most systems. It's applying it to human beings that the problems begin.
Raw, unchecked capitalism will result in failure just like any other form of government. Like Don suggested, it eventually evolves into a tiny number of people controlling the vast majority of capital. Labor strife, crime, monopolies are all symptoms of the unchecked system. Without some "communist" ideals, America would likely represent a feudal state by now. Most markets would now be controlled by monopolies and the "invisible hand" theory of capitalism would no longer shape the economy - it would be shaped by companies looking to maximize their profit (which in a monopolistic state no longer produces an efficiency). So rather than the "evil" government dictating production, it would essentially be dictated by an unelected oligarchy (which Don again states precipitates revolution). No system is perfect in it's purest form - they naturally deteriorate into another model, ending with anarchy. Then the process begins again.
As far as Roosevelt goes, no one is saying he didn't make mistakes. I don't agree with payroll taxes, a minimum wage, or a welfare state. But the truth is these modifications are needed in some form. As for his mistakes, sure he made em - but it sure as hell beat doing nothing. If nothing else he inspired the people, mobilized them, gave them hope and the idea that times would change. I find this pretty important in the years leading up to WWII.
The SAC dollar. I can't even spell SACAGGEWWEWAESA??!!!??? The Lewis and Clark expedition was certainly a big event in our history, but we could have put something else on the dollar coin to depict that event. I think the reason we chose the figure we did was to make it politically correct.
It's amazing how ignorant a large percentage of this population has become. We "need" a little socialism huh? The same kind of crap your republican and democrat masters feed you, you relish and drool for.
So enjoy it. Savor it and teach your children that it's really the socialism that's "saved" America from the evils of Freedom.
Go all the way though rather than waste time using half and three quarter measures. Sign up to the socialist party.
90 posts and not a single person has remotely alluded to Socialism as the be-all, end-all answer to government, but you've tagged everyone with the slightest admiration of Roosevelt (generally considered to be one of our finest leaders) as an overt Marxist.
<< <i> Child labor laws were a response to pure capitalism. >>
I always thought it was in response to bad parenting.
<< <i> Any system in which a handful of individuals can gain absolute control of the population of a nation without consent precipitates revolution. >>
Please give an example of a few people that controlled the population prior to FDR.
<< <i>The personalities of this world can be divided into two camps, artists and critics. When viewed through the lens of historical perspective, perhaps President Roosevelt chose the wrong path to financial recovery, but he did manage to be elected to the presidency several times. To those who are his detractors, I'll ask that you examine and compare your own accomplishments and see which camp you belong in, and why the readership should give more credence to your philosophy than his accomplishments. >>
Meaningless analysis. Hitler managed to get his party elected and himself installed as Chancellor, through DEMOCRATIC means.
<< <i>MrEarlygold, have you read Conrad Black's book "Champion of Freedom"? It offers a slightly different perspective than "FDR's Folly". The following is a quote from a reviewer that does a good job of summarizing FDR's accomplishments.
"Black's contention that FDR was not merely the 20th Century's greatest American President, but the most important person of the 20th Century--period. He bases this on seven key accomplishments:1) FDR was, alongside Churchill, the co-savior of Western Civilization during its darkest hour. >>
I guess Black forgot about the Yalta conference where FDR gave away eastern Europe to Stalin, over Churchills objections and plunging Western Civilization into 50 years of cold war. WWII was started to keep the Nazi's from taking over Poland and it ended with the USSR taking over Poland.
<< <i>2) FDR ended American isolation and permanently engaged America in Europe and the Far East. Roosevelt, an anti-colonialist since his school days, predicted the crack-up of the British Empire. Decades before the fact, he foresaw China's emergence as a major power, and the Middle East as a potential source of trouble. >>
Wonder how FDR missed communism as a threat? Chruchill figured that out before WWII was even over. Maybe FDR didn't regard communism as a threat.
<< <i>3) Roosevelt reinvented the Federal Government's relationship to the people, >>
I'll say. Now the government even tells me what size my toliet has to be.
<< <i>Roosevelt did indeed revive the domestic economy, reducing unemployment from over 30% in 1933 to about 7% by 1939. >>
I think Black has a few numbers confused. At the height of the depression, unemployment barely topped 25%. In 1939 it was 17% not 7%.
<< <i> Shattering the Yalta Myth, Black contends and convinces that Roosevelt created the circumstances which allowed his predecessors--from Truman through Clinton--to complete the Wilsonian objective and make the world truly safe for democracy. Indeed, Europe as it exists today is very much as Roosevelt envisioned it. >>
Yalta myth? As if the 50 year cold war didn't happen.
<< <i>6) FDR was unmatched in his sheer political brilliance and mastery of the varied moods of the American electorate. He knew when to push forward, when to pull back, and when to slacken the reigns of power. His clairvoyance extended to the politics of other nations, and had Churchill followed his political advice, the Prime Minister likely would not have been dumped by the British electorate mere weeks after victory over Germany.. >>
Kind of like the congressional democrats were dumped in the very next election.
<< <i>It's likely those that rail against the socialist leanings of the government have just done their taxes. >>
Or actually bothered to read a view of history that didn't come from a public school.
I always thought it was in response to bad parenting.
The child labor laws? Do you think the employers were self-policing, or were they willing to hire young children to perform dangerous jobs?
Please give an example of a few people that controlled the population prior to FDR.
Please give me an example of a purely capitalist society prior to FDR.
Meaningless analysis. Hitler managed to get his party elected and himself installed as Chancellor, through DEMOCRATIC means.
Hilter was apparently fairly sucessful in accomplishing his goals. The libertarians are not.
FDR was hoping the future United Nations organization would be the place to deal with Stalin, not at Yalta. He told Adolf Berle "I didn't say the result was good. I said it was the best I could do." Both Roosevelt and Churchill recognized the reality of Soviet power in 1945.
Wonder how FDR missed communism as a threat? Chruchill figured that out before WWII was even over. Maybe FDR didn't regard communism as a threat.
See above.
I'll say. Now the government even tells me what size my toliet has to be.
Ah, the price of living together.
think Black has a few numbers confused. At the height of the depression, unemployment barely topped 25%. In 1939 it was 17% not 7%.
17% does not include the workers in the workfare program.
Yalta myth? As if the 50 year cold war didn't happen
As opposed to direct confrontation of the Soviets in Europe even though they had not attacked us? The pre-emptive strike policy didn't exist until VERY recently
WWII was started to keep the Nazi's from taking over Poland and it ended with the USSR taking over Poland.
And I thought it was to prevent Nazi Germany from conquering all of Europe.
Or actually bothered to read a view of history that didn't come from a public school.
On that we can agree. The view you've expressed did not come from the public school system.
Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
<< <i>I always thought it was in response to bad parenting.
The child labor laws? Do you think the employers were self-policing, or were they willing to hire young childred to perform dangerous jobs? >>
Apparently the parents weren't self policing.
.
<< <i>Please give an example of a few people that controlled the population prior to FDR.
Please give me an example of a purely capitalist society prior to FDR. >>
United States 1789-1861. Now answer my question.
.
<< <i>Meaningless analysis. Hitler managed to get his party elected and himself installed as Chancellor, through DEMOCRATIC means.
Hilter was apparently fairly sucessful in accomplishing his goals. The libertarians are not.. >>
You were holding up FDR, not the libertarians, as being worthy of priase because he managed to get elected four times
<< <i>FDR was hoping the future United Nations organization would be the place to deal with Stalin. >>
Kind of like the liberal response to dealing with terrorism. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
<< <i>at Yalta He told Adolf Berle "I didn't say the result was good. I said it was the best I could do." >>
And that's the mark of a great leader. "I didn't say it was good" ?
<< <i>Both Roosevelt and Churchill recognized the reality of Soviet power in 1945. >>
The difference is, Churchill actually wanted to do something about it.
<< <i>I'll say. Now the government even tells me what size my toliet has to be.
Ah, the price of living together. >>
I don't like living with Government. They never do their share of the chores.
<< <i> think Black has a few numbers confused. At the height of the depression, unemployment barely topped 25%. In 1939 it was 17% not 7%.
17% does not include the workers in the workfare program. >>
For the sake of argument, I'll give you that point because it's even more ridiculous. It doesn't include workfare? Well, why not just have government hire everyone and call it a day? 0% unemployment then........just like the USSR had.
<< <i>Yalta myth? As if the 50 year cold war didn't happen
As opposed to direct confrontation of the Soviets in Europe even though they had not attacked us? The pre-emptive strike policy didn't exist until VERY recently >>
You mean just like Germany didn't attack us? It seems we took a pre-emptive policy toward them to keep them out of Poland.
<< <i>WWII was started to keep the Nazi's from taking over Poland and it ended with the USSR taking over Poland.
And I thought it was to prevent Nazi Germany from conquering all of Europe. >>
Sounds pre-emptive. If only FDR had cared that communists conquered half of Europe, and most of Asia, and most of central America, and most of Africa.................
<< <i>Or actually bothered to read a view of history that didn't come from a public school.
On that we can agree. The view you've expressed did not come from the public school system. >>
Yes, you rarely get fact based history in the public schools.
<< I always thought it was in response to bad parenting. Apparently the parents weren't self policing.
I don't think the parents were the only culpable party. Apparently you do.
Please give me an example of a purely capitalist society prior to FDR. >> United States 1789-1861. Now answer my question.
Okeedoke. The Sherman Anti-trust act was passed in the late 1800's specifically to prevent the abuses pure capitalism invites. It was largely unsucessful, but determined by Congress to be necessary.
"Trusts and monopolies are concentrations of wealth in the hands of a few. Such conglomerations of economic resources are thought to be injurious to the public and individuals because such trusts minimize, if not obliterate normal marketplace competition, and yield undesirable price controls. These, in turn, cause markets to stagnate and sap individual initiative.
To prevent trusts from creating restraints on trade or commerce and reducing competition, Congress passed the Sherman Antitrust Act in 1890. The Sherman Act was designed to maintain economic liberty, and to eliminate restraints on trade and competition. The Sherman Act is the main source of Antitrust law."
<< Meaningless analysis. Hitler managed to get his party elected and himself installed as Chancellor, through DEMOCRATIC means.
Hilter was apparently fairly sucessful in accomplishing his goals. The libertarians are not.. >>
You were holding up FDR, not the libertarians, as being worthy of priase because he managed to get elected four times.
No, actually I was questioning the accomplishments of the critics on this thread, and wondering which of them had led a nation.
<< FDR was hoping the future United Nations organization would be the place to deal with Stalin. >>
Kind of like the liberal response to dealing with terrorism. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
There are those who must do, ahd those who must say what they'd have done differently if only the nation would have elected THEM president.
<< at Yalta He told Adolf Berle "I didn't say the result was good. I said it was the best I could do." >> And that's the mark of a great leader. "I didn't say it was good" ?
Yes, it is. It's honest and accurate.
<< Both Roosevelt and Churchill recognized the reality of Soviet power in 1945. >> The difference is, Churchill actually wanted to do something about it.
His job lasted two weeks after the war ended.
<< I'll say. Now the government even tells me what size my toliet has to be. Ah, the price of living together. >>
I don't like living with Government. They never do their share of the chores.
Agreed.
<< think Black has a few numbers confused. At the height of the depression, unemployment barely topped 25%. In 1939 it was 17% not 7%.
17% does not include the workers in the workfare program. >>
For the sake of argument, I'll give you that point because it's even more ridiculous. It doesn't include workfare? Well, why not just have government hire everyone and call it a day? 0% unemployment then........just like the USSR had.
Well, you could just make it punishable by death.
<< Yalta myth? As if the 50 year cold war didn't happen
As opposed to direct confrontation of the Soviets in Europe even though they had not attacked us? The pre-emptive strike policy didn't exist until VERY recently >>
You mean just like Germany didn't attack us? It seems we took a pre-emptive policy toward them to keep them out of Poland.
We came to the aid of our allies, who they did invade.
<< WWII was started to keep the Nazi's from taking over Poland and it ended with the USSR taking over Poland. And I thought it was to prevent Nazi Germany from conquering all of Europe. >>
Sounds pre-emptive. If only FDR had cared that communists conquered half of Europe, and most of Asia, and most of central America, and most of Africa.................
It's much easier to look back rather than forward, but at that time, the Soviets had not.
<< Or actually bothered to read a view of history that didn't come from a public school. On that we can agree. The view you've expressed did not come from the public school system. >>
Yes, you rarely get fact based history in the public schools.
On that, we disagree. Revisionists always hate mainstream academic history.
Having said that, it's off to bed for me, so perhaps we can play again tomorrow.
Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
<<The child labor laws? Do you think the employers were self-policing, or were they willing to hire young childred to perform dangerous jobs?
Apparently the parents weren't self policing.>>
Do you live in your own plastic bubble? You are arguing the same crap that 19th century rich industrialist were spewing out. Have you ever considered that most working families in the 1800s and early 1900s were bearly capable of supporting themselves when both parents were working full time? In 1901 (Canada), the estimated cost of living was $13.38 a week, but at best the the average male worker would make $8.25 a week. Now do you understand why children needed to work inorder to supplement the families income? If anyone wants to see the results of unrestrained capitalism take a look at the working conditions of the 19th century.
<< Both Roosevelt and Churchill recognized the reality of Soviet power in 1945.
The difference is, Churchill actually wanted to do something about it.>>
Have you heard of the Moscow accords? Churchill "gave" Stalin free rein in the Baltic states, Bulgaria, Romania and Yugoslavia in return for a Soviet promise not to intervene in Greece. Before you say that Stalin did intervene in Greece note that there are national socialist movements that are not endorsed by the Soviet Union. A good example would be the Chinese Communist Party, Tito's partisans and how Stalin dissoved the Communist International in 1941
Comments
<< <i>Telll ya what. I think you're ignorant. So let's avoid each other ok? >>
Sounds good to me.
I agree with ms70.
The SBA sucks bad.
And to the guy who thinks one's post count somehow means a damned thing:
you sir, are a fool.
tim
2 Cam-Slams!
1 Russ POTD!
e-mail me here
WINNER:
POTD 8-30-05 (awarded by dthigpen)
POTD 9-8-05 (awarded by gsaguy)
GSAGUY Slam 12-10-04
The US coin which most poorly illustrates America is the Ethel Kennedy Special Olympics commem.
Whew, could they put an uglier person on a coin?
I remember when the SBA were first released and schools started teaching about Anthony and the women's suffrage movement. From what I understand, Anthony was chosen in part because she staunchly opposed Margaret Sanger and others' efforts to make birth control and abortion available to women, which made Anthony a palatable choice to the Reagan administration.
Aside from that, Anthony was on the Board of Lady Managers at the 1892 Columbian Exposition, where she was the driving force behind the issuance of the Isabella quarter. In that respect it made sense to honor Anthony for her contribution to American coinage.
-Jay
e-mail me here
WINNER:
POTD 8-30-05 (awarded by dthigpen)
POTD 9-8-05 (awarded by gsaguy)
GSAGUY Slam 12-10-04
This doesn't includes dozens of other suggestions or submissions, including our own Daniel Carr's (board member) designs.
2 Cam-Slams!
1 Russ POTD!
<< <i>Way too harsh on Roosevelt, get real. Economic ideas had run out, Laise-faire capitalism had COMPLETELY, 100%, FAILED with the Great Depression and millions were hungry and umemployed. Darn right he started government work programs, Social Security, etc. Our system is much better off today WITH these ideas then WITHOUT these ideas. The question is one of how extreme you take things, and Roosevelt is not responsible for what future Congresses and Presidents did with his ideas. >>
You, unfortunately like most american's, don't really understand what the depression was about. I'm not trying to be offensive toward you either, so don't take it that way. So, let me give you the cliff notes version of what happened. There were many depressions in the US prior to the "great depression", 1873, 1893 and 1907 for instance. Why didn't they last like the 1929 depression? It wasn't because of the failure of laise-faire capitalism. In fact, it was laise-faire capitalism that kept the prior depressions from becoming a "great depression" With the advent of the Federal Reserve system in 1914, the money supply was effectively, and practically, controlled by the government. Roosevelt did several things to exacerbate the depression (hoover wasn't much better). One of the things he did was SHRINK the money supply by having the fed INCREASE insterest rates. As you can imagine, that snuffed out ANY hope of a quick recovery. He also increased the cost of labor by passing minumum wage laws, which kept companies from hiring new workers. Those are just two of the reasons that the depression lasted until 1941 but there are many more. You really need to become more well versed on history and fundamental economics before you say cliched things like "Laise-faire capitalism had COMPLETELY, 100%, FAILED" It was the trying of the new government controls that failed, not capitalism. Notice how the government LOWERS interest rates now during a recession. No one seems to realize it's because RAISING it was tried and failed.
Rgrds
TP
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
<< <i>Roosevelt is the worst. On the "ideas" of America and liberty he and his clan were statist, big government socialists >>
Somewhat true, then again we see how sorely Hoover's fiscally conservative politics exacerbated the problem. Don't get me wrong: I'm a social and fiscal conservative. But when in the most extreme possible situations (such as the Great Depression and the World War that followed on its heels), extraordinary measures are needed. It's an accepted fact that government spending stimulates the economy, and that's just what FDR did (or tried to do). We conservatives would prefer (nowdays) to give people tax cuts rather than tax increases and increased spending, but any economist will tell you the government spending multiplier is slightly larger than the tax cut multiplier; that is, increased government spending helps the economy more than tax cuts. The reason many (including myself) prefer tax cuts is idealistic, not pragmatic.
We should just count ourselves fortunate that Huey Pierce Long got himself shot before he had the chance to become president. That 100% tax on all earnings over 100k per year would have been unreal--and truly socialist. In short, I agree that in a minor depression or recession FDR would have been a nut to do what he did, but in a time when only extreme measures could help, FDR did his best.
For all the liberal who are tempted to respond, by today's standards, based on his policies Kennedy would be a Republican today.
Currently attempting the 12 Coin US Gold Type Set and the 20th Century US Major Coin Type Set. Completed a Franklin Half Proof Set.
<< <i>
<< <i>Roosevelt is the worst. On the "ideas" of America and liberty he and his clan were statist, big government socialists >>
Somewhat true, then again we see how sorely Hoover's fiscally conservative politics exacerbated the problem. Don't get me wrong: I'm a social and fiscal conservative. But when in the most extreme possible situations (such as the Great Depression and the World War that followed on its heels), extraordinary measures are needed. It's an accepted fact that government spending stimulates the economy, and that's just what FDR did (or tried to do). We conservatives would prefer (nowdays) to give people tax cuts rather than tax increases and increased spending, but any economist will tell you the government spending multiplier is slightly larger than the tax cut multiplier; that is, increased government spending helps the economy more than tax cuts. The reason many (including myself) prefer tax cuts is idealistic, not pragmatic.
We should just count ourselves fortunate that Huey Pierce Long got himself shot before he had the chance to become president. That 100% tax on all earnings over 100k per year would have been unreal--and truly socialist. In short, I agree that in a minor depression or recession FDR would have been a nut to do what he did, but in a time when only extreme measures could help, FDR did his best. >>
You guys are killing me. Hoover didn't have fiscally conservative policies. He was FDR light. He raised fed interest rates and came up with several new deal style work programs etc. etc. He, along with FDR, set in motion policies that created the "great depression" Had they not interfered, it would have been another recession such as the 1907 1893 etc. In spite of what had been done, we were actually coming out of the depression in 1934 until FDR's new deal started to kick in. Also, the government spending stuff is not accurate either. The ONLY way government stimulates the economy is by INCREASING the money supply. What they spend is a function of what we owe, i.e. the budget deficit, and is counterproductive to a healthy economy. If government spending helped the economy, then all the banana republics wouldn't have to devalue their currency and declare bankruptcy every 10-15 years. Really, you guys are killing me.........
e-mail me here
WINNER:
POTD 8-30-05 (awarded by dthigpen)
POTD 9-8-05 (awarded by gsaguy)
GSAGUY Slam 12-10-04
42/92
Hmmm - judging by your sig picture, they already did!
When the government spends a dollar, where does it go? It floats thru the economy and the government ends up getting most of it back in taxes. But in the meantime, it puts people to work.
And it seems to me that what we owe is a function of what we spend, not the other way around.
The question was "What coin most poorly illustrates America?", not "What plastic most poorly illustrates America. Surely, Dorkkarl, you should be the last one making that mistake!
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
We let women vote and now look what a mess we're in.
It appears obvious that since ALL presidents have been MEN, that the mess we are in was 100% made by men - not women. DUH!
a big "pffffffffffffffffffffffffftttttttttttttt" to Mr. Donovan
Well, we did let women vote, and we are sort of in a mess...
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>A good ol' flame throwin' party!
The US coin which most poorly illustrates America is the Ethel Kennedy Special Olympics commem.
Whew, could they put an uglier person on a coin? >>
According to much of the world, we are known as "ugly Amercians" so ironically the Eunice (not Ethel) Kennedy Shriver commemorative may very accurately represent this country and our wealth. Eunice's husband helped establish the Peace Corps, which tries to counter the "ugly American image".
I agree that this is the ugliest portrait I have seen on a U.S. coin since Robert Scot's Matron Head large cents of 1816-1835. However, the question was which coin most poorly illustrates America and why.
My votes are for either the coins that represent nothing (3 cent silver or Shield Nickel) or perhaps the Washington/Carver commemorative half dollar, authorized "to oppose the spread of communism amongst American negroes".
A much tougher question, perhaps for another thread, is what coin Best illustrates America and why? My vote is for the Bridgeport commem. I'll tell you why if someone starts that other thread and keeps it focused on coins.
I was just thinking of the very same question and the very same coin.
"There's a sucker born every minute."
Kennedy half. Kennedy's presidencial record speaks for itself, and the reverse is some presidential eagle?
I would have picked Ike, but the reverse with the moon landing is better than some presidential seal.
So we can extrapolate that the more the government spends, the better and stronger is the economy.
So why not have the government do ALL it can to help the economy, and raise taxes to 100%. In fact, we should also allow the government to own 100% of everything, because surely the government would be positioned to make the most efficient and fair decisions across the board.
Isn't socialism great?!!!
"Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." -Luke 11:9
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." -Deut. 6:4-5
"For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; He will save us." -Isaiah 33:22
I find it particularly detestable that we should glorify a president who did so much to undermine American freedom and Americanism in general, and I'm referring to none other than FDR. How can we say it was right of him to nationalize (steal) all the gold immediately upon taking office? And how about implementing all possible socialist/communist policies he could? And then packing the Supreme Court in order to get his way when those ideas were disallowed? And running for his third term in office? And going against his campaign promises of staying out of the war? And then nationalizing production of the whole nation during the war? And getting America involved into more "foreign entanglements" that to this day dictate practically every move we make?
Anyway, you get my drift. I also don't feel Lincoln is the best one to glorify either.
"Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." -Luke 11:9
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." -Deut. 6:4-5
"For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; He will save us." -Isaiah 33:22
Isn't socialism great?!!!
Well yes I mean after all, why should you be so selfish to think you should work your butt off for your family and your own interests. I mean, think of the greater good like mr roosevelt and the rest of the politician sleaze would say.
The IRS is dispatching their people right now to SE Asia ( if you'd like to see the link I'll be happy to provide it, it's on thaivisa.com) to make sure that all those evil Americans who have tossed their chips in and are living on foreign soil pay taxes on any income they might be deriving from their food stands or whatever else they are doing as expats in exotic places. How dare those people try to get away!
The Vietnamese government ( communist you know) just "lowered" the tax rate and now the maximum is at 40%, while foreign investors are given tax free status up too 15 years ( gee I wonder why).
Think of the greater good. I mean cmon, are you some kind of extremist?
Interesting how it's impossible to NOT mix historical facts with our coinage, and how few people who claim to be involved in Numismatics even have a clue of these facts.
To really study Numismatics, you have to be drawn to the truths about history.
Rgrds
TP
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
But it's more insidious that according to the bureaucrats, even if you disavow your American citizenship, you'll still be hounded into eternity for American taxes. So that makes Americans slaves to the state. Now let's not get into all the executive orders that codify that very state of slavery.
"Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." -Luke 11:9
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." -Deut. 6:4-5
"For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; He will save us." -Isaiah 33:22
<< <i>I thought there was an exemption of $75K/yr for Americans living overseas.
But it's more insidious that according to the bureaucrats, even if you disavow your American citizenship, you'll still be hounded into eternity for American taxes. So that makes Americans slaves to the state. Now let's not get into all the executive orders that codify that very state of slavery.
Well that supposedly is true however why then would they be dispatching the tax troops to SE Asia? Then there is the issue of the "ex-patriot" tax which the previous administration proposed ( not sure if it was signed or not although I think it has been which would make sense considering the dispatching of said troops. It means that say you've had it and have decided to leave and live on an island in the south pacific ( or whatever), you are obligated to pay the government an "exit" tax or ex-patriot tax amounting to as much as half your stack.
Like a financial berlin wall.
Yes it is slavery. And yes it did start with Lincoln although I was reluctant to go there as well.
Rgrds
TP
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
<< <i>Wait a minute, this was supposed to be a coin bash thread, not a history lesson.
Let's get back to the point at hand, which coin most sucks as far as illustrating America and her values? >>
Wait a minute, let's do both. I am being reminded of many things I have forgotten.
<< <i>
<< <i>Wait a minute, this was supposed to be a coin bash thread, not a history lesson.
Let's get back to the point at hand, which coin most sucks as far as illustrating America and her values? >>
Wait a minute, let's do both. I am being reminded of many things I have forgotten. >>
Rgrds
TP
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
This is a free country and you are entitled to write what you believe but just remember who was the key political figure in the World that was instrumental in leading the fight to defeat Fascism so that today you still have the right to think and write what you believe.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>Roosevelt is the worst with respect to American Ideals?
This is a free country and you are entitled to write what you believe but just remember who was the key political figure in the World that was instrumental in leading the fight to defeat Fascism so that today you still have the right to think and write what you believe. >>
would you please define for me what "your" rendition" of the american idea was then? Maybe those of us who think that Freedom was the primary ideal and what the American revolution was fought for, are confused.
Maybe people like you are right, that socialism is a really good thing and that we should all be slaves to the government. I'd just like to hear it from you. How bout it huh?
TP
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
I think the point is that whether we agree with Roosevelt's politics or not he was
instrumental in prosecuting a war against the most dangerous enemies this coun-
try has ever fought. Whether we believe his policies alleviated or exascerbated the
most serious economic crisis this country has ever seen, he still led the country and
still maintained his courage and integrity.
Say what you will about the man but he did what he thought was right. Unless some-
one is eating babies there is value and humanity in this.
Is this really the proper forum for such discussion?
edited to add question.
Freedom certainly includes the right of free speech.
My comments did not involve socialism or people being slaves to government.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>Perhaps the time has come for this thread to be moved to the open forum in light of the political content.
Freedom certainly includes the right of free speech.
My comments did not involve socialism or people being slaves to government. >>
You can move anywhere you like or would you advocate force in which to ply your "thoughts"?. You chose to type your thoughts here and it would be a good idea for you to try to internalize what the thread was about before making your retreat.
It has everything to do with the "idea" of America and since you are a strong advocate or apologist for a man whose idea was to circumvent the Constitution with his brand of socialism, you have no standing to even use the word Freedom in the context of the thread.
TP
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
Quite a thread. Like shaking a bottle of beer. Lots of foam.
The Shield nickel might be next. Back in the '60's one critic said it looked like a tombstone, and I don't that was far from wrong.
Among the modern coins, the SBA dollar was ugly and was issued for totaly PC reasons. The Sackie is more attractive, but also PC big time.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Socialists? Of course we are to a degree. Pure capitalism can be pretty unforgiving. There are those in our society who through no fault of their own lack the ability to provide for themselves or their children. Child labor laws were a response to pure capitalism. Pure capitalism has it's own fatal flaw. Any system in which a handful of individuals can gain absolute control of the population of a nation without consent precipitates revolution. Libertarians who long for such a system often fail to realize why it isn't our chosen goal. The original vision for this nation was that of a republic in which the landowners were the only ones allowed to vote. That didn't last long either.
The personalities of this world can be divided into two camps, artists and critics. When viewed through the lens of historical perspective, perhaps President Roosevelt chose the wrong path to financial recovery, but he did manage to be elected to the presidency several times. To those who are his detractors, I'll ask that you examine and compare your own accomplishments and see which camp you belong in, and why the readership should give more credence to your philosophy than his accomplishments.
MrEarlygold, have you read Conrad Black's book "Champion of Freedom"? It offers a slightly different perspective than "FDR's Folly". The following is a quote from a reviewer that does a good job of summarizing FDR's accomplishments.
"Black's contention that FDR was not merely the 20th Century's greatest American President, but the most important person of the 20th Century--period. He bases this on seven key accomplishments:1) FDR was, alongside Churchill, the co-savior of Western Civilization during its darkest hour.2) FDR ended American isolation and permanently engaged America in Europe and the Far East. Roosevelt, an anti-colonialist since his school days, predicted the crack-up of the British Empire. Decades before the fact, he foresaw China's emergence as a major power, and the Middle East as a potential source of trouble. 3) Roosevelt reinvented the Federal Government's relationship to the people, reviving the economy and rescuing capitalism without resorting to the Fascistic and Socialistic extremes of other countries. Despite the contentions in the recently published "FDR's Folly," Roosevelt did indeed revive the domestic economy, reducing unemployment from over 30% in 1933 to about 7% by 1939. On top of the economic improvements, FDR's "workfare" programs resulted in the creation of an infrastructure in use to this day: The Golden Gate and Bay Bridges, Hoover Dam, the Tennessee Valley Authority--which brought electricity to millions of rural citizens, and countless smaller projects.4) FDR was an almost uniformly successful war leader, moreso than Washington, Madison, Lincoln, or Wilson. He chose the right people to carry out his war aims--Marshall, Nimitz, MacArthur, and Eisenhower--and the few times he overrode their objections (insisting on giving the defeat of Germany top priority and authorizing Doolittle's raid on Tokyo) the results were favorable for the Allies. Despite the disaster at Pearl Harbor (for which Black rightly lays blame at the local commanders' feet) the Americans prosecuted World War II with remarkably few defeats. Under FDR, America produced unimaginable amounts of war material which sped victory on all fronts, all while America endured the least number of war casualties among Allied nations.5) Shattering the Yalta Myth, Black contends and convinces that Roosevelt created the circumstances which allowed his predecessors--from Truman through Clinton--to complete the Wilsonian objective and make the world truly safe for democracy. Indeed, Europe as it exists today is very much as Roosevelt envisioned it. Sadly, if Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson had studied his views on the Far East, the Vietnam war would have likely been avoided. The use of the United Nations to prosecute the First Gulf War and to harmlessly vent tensions between nations--as in the Cuban Missile Crisis--was again as FDR intended. But Black also points out that Roosevelt would be appalled at how the UN has degenerated in the last decade into a platform for America bashing.6) FDR was unmatched in his sheer political brilliance and mastery of the varied moods of the American electorate. He knew when to push forward, when to pull back, and when to slacken the reigns of power. His clairvoyance extended to the politics of other nations, and had Churchill followed his political advice, the Prime Minister likely would not have been dumped by the British electorate mere weeks after victory over Germany.7) Not least, by his triumph over Polio (although recently a theory has surfaced that he actually may have been stricken with Guillian-Barre) Franklin Roosevelt was then, and remains today, a symbol of inspiration for all those faced with seemingly insurmountable odds."
President Roosevelt is portrayed on the dime because of his association with the "March of Dimes". Just the kind of guy we'd all like to vilify. It's likely those that rail against the socialist leanings of the government have just done their taxes.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
Raw, unchecked capitalism will result in failure just like any other form of government. Like Don suggested, it eventually evolves into a tiny number of people controlling the vast majority of capital. Labor strife, crime, monopolies are all symptoms of the unchecked system. Without some "communist" ideals, America would likely represent a feudal state by now. Most markets would now be controlled by monopolies and the "invisible hand" theory of capitalism would no longer shape the economy - it would be shaped by companies looking to maximize their profit (which in a monopolistic state no longer produces an efficiency). So rather than the "evil" government dictating production, it would essentially be dictated by an unelected oligarchy (which Don again states precipitates revolution). No system is perfect in it's purest form - they naturally deteriorate into another model, ending with anarchy. Then the process begins again.
As far as Roosevelt goes, no one is saying he didn't make mistakes. I don't agree with payroll taxes, a minimum wage, or a welfare state. But the truth is these modifications are needed in some form. As for his mistakes, sure he made em - but it sure as hell beat doing nothing. If nothing else he inspired the people, mobilized them, gave them hope and the idea that times would change. I find this pretty important in the years leading up to WWII.
2 Cam-Slams!
1 Russ POTD!
2 Cam-Slams!
1 Russ POTD!
Looking for PCGS AU58 Washington's, 32-63.
Bile at best.
It's amazing how ignorant a large percentage of this population has become. We "need" a little socialism huh? The same kind of crap your republican and democrat masters feed you, you relish and drool for.
So enjoy it. Savor it and teach your children that it's really the socialism that's "saved" America from the evils of Freedom.
Go all the way though rather than waste time using half and three quarter measures. Sign up to the socialist party.
TP
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
Thank God moderates set the tone...
2 Cam-Slams!
1 Russ POTD!
<< <i> Child labor laws were a response to pure capitalism. >>
I always thought it was in response to bad parenting.
<< <i> Any system in which a handful of individuals can gain absolute control of the population of a nation without consent precipitates revolution. >>
Please give an example of a few people that controlled the population prior to FDR.
<< <i>The personalities of this world can be divided into two camps, artists and critics. When viewed through the lens of historical perspective, perhaps President Roosevelt chose the wrong path to financial recovery, but he did manage to be elected to the presidency several times. To those who are his detractors, I'll ask that you examine and compare your own accomplishments and see which camp you belong in, and why the readership should give more credence to your philosophy than his accomplishments. >>
Meaningless analysis. Hitler managed to get his party elected and himself installed as Chancellor, through DEMOCRATIC means.
<< <i>MrEarlygold, have you read Conrad Black's book "Champion of Freedom"? It offers a slightly different perspective than "FDR's Folly". The following is a quote from a reviewer that does a good job of summarizing FDR's accomplishments.
"Black's contention that FDR was not merely the 20th Century's greatest American President, but the most important person of the 20th Century--period. He bases this on seven key accomplishments:1) FDR was, alongside Churchill, the co-savior of Western Civilization during its darkest hour. >>
I guess Black forgot about the Yalta conference where FDR gave away eastern Europe to Stalin, over Churchills objections and plunging Western Civilization into 50 years of cold war. WWII was started to keep the Nazi's from taking over Poland and it ended with the USSR taking over Poland.
<< <i>2) FDR ended American isolation and permanently engaged America in Europe and the Far East. Roosevelt, an anti-colonialist since his school days, predicted the crack-up of the British Empire. Decades before the fact, he foresaw China's emergence as a major power, and the Middle East as a potential source of trouble. >>
Wonder how FDR missed communism as a threat? Chruchill figured that out before WWII was even over. Maybe FDR didn't regard communism as a threat.
<< <i>3) Roosevelt reinvented the Federal Government's relationship to the people, >>
I'll say. Now the government even tells me what size my toliet has to be.
<< <i>Roosevelt did indeed revive the domestic economy, reducing unemployment from over 30% in 1933 to about 7% by 1939. >>
I think Black has a few numbers confused. At the height of the depression, unemployment barely topped 25%. In 1939 it was 17% not 7%.
<< <i> Shattering the Yalta Myth, Black contends and convinces that Roosevelt created the circumstances which allowed his predecessors--from Truman through Clinton--to complete the Wilsonian objective and make the world truly safe for democracy. Indeed, Europe as it exists today is very much as Roosevelt envisioned it. >>
Yalta myth?
<< <i>6) FDR was unmatched in his sheer political brilliance and mastery of the varied moods of the American electorate. He knew when to push forward, when to pull back, and when to slacken the reigns of power. His clairvoyance extended to the politics of other nations, and had Churchill followed his political advice, the Prime Minister likely would not have been dumped by the British electorate mere weeks after victory over Germany.. >>
Kind of like the congressional democrats were dumped in the very next election.
<< <i>It's likely those that rail against the socialist leanings of the government have just done their taxes.
Or actually bothered to read a view of history that didn't come from a public school.
The child labor laws? Do you think the employers were self-policing, or were they willing to hire young children to perform dangerous jobs?
Please give an example of a few people that controlled the population prior to FDR.
Please give me an example of a purely capitalist society prior to FDR.
Meaningless analysis. Hitler managed to get his party elected and himself installed as Chancellor, through DEMOCRATIC means.
Hilter was apparently fairly sucessful in accomplishing his goals. The libertarians are not.
FDR was hoping the future United Nations organization would be the place to deal with Stalin, not at Yalta. He told Adolf Berle "I didn't say the result was good. I said it was the best I could do." Both Roosevelt and Churchill recognized the reality of Soviet power in 1945.
Wonder how FDR missed communism as a threat? Chruchill figured that out before WWII was even over. Maybe FDR didn't regard communism as a threat.
See above.
I'll say. Now the government even tells me what size my toliet has to be.
Ah, the price of living together.
think Black has a few numbers confused. At the height of the depression, unemployment barely topped 25%. In 1939 it was 17% not 7%.
17% does not include the workers in the workfare program.
Yalta myth? As if the 50 year cold war didn't happen
As opposed to direct confrontation of the Soviets in Europe even though they had not attacked us? The pre-emptive strike policy didn't exist until VERY recently
WWII was started to keep the Nazi's from taking over Poland and it ended with the USSR taking over Poland.
And I thought it was to prevent Nazi Germany from conquering all of Europe.
Or actually bothered to read a view of history that didn't come from a public school.
On that we can agree. The view you've expressed did not come from the public school system.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
San Diego, CA
<< <i>I always thought it was in response to bad parenting.
The child labor laws? Do you think the employers were self-policing, or were they willing to hire young childred to perform dangerous jobs? >>
Apparently the parents weren't self policing.
.
<< <i>Please give an example of a few people that controlled the population prior to FDR.
Please give me an example of a purely capitalist society prior to FDR. >>
United States 1789-1861. Now answer my question.
.
<< <i>Meaningless analysis. Hitler managed to get his party elected and himself installed as Chancellor, through DEMOCRATIC means.
Hilter was apparently fairly sucessful in accomplishing his goals. The libertarians are not.. >>
You were holding up FDR, not the libertarians, as being worthy of priase because he managed to get elected four times
<< <i>FDR was hoping the future United Nations organization would be the place to deal with Stalin. >>
Kind of like the liberal response to dealing with terrorism. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
<< <i>at Yalta He told Adolf Berle "I didn't say the result was good. I said it was the best I could do." >>
And that's the mark of a great leader. "I didn't say it was good" ?
<< <i>Both Roosevelt and Churchill recognized the reality of Soviet power in 1945. >>
The difference is, Churchill actually wanted to do something about it.
<< <i>I'll say. Now the government even tells me what size my toliet has to be.
Ah, the price of living together. >>
I don't like living with Government. They never do their share of the chores.
<< <i> think Black has a few numbers confused. At the height of the depression, unemployment barely topped 25%. In 1939 it was 17% not 7%.
17% does not include the workers in the workfare program. >>
For the sake of argument, I'll give you that point because it's even more ridiculous. It doesn't include workfare? Well, why not just have government hire everyone and call it a day? 0% unemployment then........just like the USSR had.
<< <i>Yalta myth? As if the 50 year cold war didn't happen
As opposed to direct confrontation of the Soviets in Europe even though they had not attacked us? The pre-emptive strike policy didn't exist until VERY recently >>
You mean just like Germany didn't attack us? It seems we took a pre-emptive policy toward them to keep them out of Poland.
<< <i>WWII was started to keep the Nazi's from taking over Poland and it ended with the USSR taking over Poland.
And I thought it was to prevent Nazi Germany from conquering all of Europe. >>
Sounds pre-emptive. If only FDR had cared that communists conquered half of Europe, and most of Asia, and most of central America, and most of Africa.................
<< <i>Or actually bothered to read a view of history that didn't come from a public school.
On that we can agree. The view you've expressed did not come from the public school system. >>
Yes, you rarely get fact based history in the public schools.
Apparently the parents weren't self policing.
I don't think the parents were the only culpable party. Apparently you do.
Please give me an example of a purely capitalist society prior to FDR. >>
United States 1789-1861. Now answer my question.
Okeedoke. The Sherman Anti-trust act was passed in the late 1800's specifically to prevent the abuses pure capitalism invites. It was largely unsucessful, but determined by Congress to be necessary.
"Trusts and monopolies are concentrations of wealth in the hands of a few. Such conglomerations of economic resources are thought to be injurious to the public and individuals because such trusts minimize, if not obliterate normal marketplace competition, and yield undesirable price controls. These, in turn, cause markets to stagnate and sap individual initiative.
To prevent trusts from creating restraints on trade or commerce and reducing competition, Congress passed the Sherman Antitrust Act in 1890. The Sherman Act was designed to maintain economic liberty, and to eliminate restraints on trade and competition. The Sherman Act is the main source of Antitrust law."
<< Meaningless analysis. Hitler managed to get his party elected and himself installed as Chancellor, through DEMOCRATIC means.
Hilter was apparently fairly sucessful in accomplishing his goals. The libertarians are not.. >>
You were holding up FDR, not the libertarians, as being worthy of priase because he managed to get elected four times.
No, actually I was questioning the accomplishments of the critics on this thread, and wondering which of them had led a nation.
<< FDR was hoping the future United Nations organization would be the place to deal with Stalin. >>
Kind of like the liberal response to dealing with terrorism. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
There are those who must do, ahd those who must say what they'd have done differently if only the nation would have elected THEM president.
<< at Yalta He told Adolf Berle "I didn't say the result was good. I said it was the best I could do." >>
And that's the mark of a great leader. "I didn't say it was good" ?
Yes, it is. It's honest and accurate.
<< Both Roosevelt and Churchill recognized the reality of Soviet power in 1945. >>
The difference is, Churchill actually wanted to do something about it.
His job lasted two weeks after the war ended.
<< I'll say. Now the government even tells me what size my toliet has to be.
Ah, the price of living together. >>
I don't like living with Government. They never do their share of the chores.
Agreed.
<< think Black has a few numbers confused. At the height of the depression, unemployment barely topped 25%. In 1939 it was 17% not 7%.
17% does not include the workers in the workfare program. >>
For the sake of argument, I'll give you that point because it's even more ridiculous. It doesn't include workfare? Well, why not just have government hire everyone and call it a day? 0% unemployment then........just like the USSR had.
Well, you could just make it punishable by death.
<< Yalta myth? As if the 50 year cold war didn't happen
As opposed to direct confrontation of the Soviets in Europe even though they had not attacked us? The pre-emptive strike policy didn't exist until VERY recently >>
You mean just like Germany didn't attack us? It seems we took a pre-emptive policy toward them to keep them out of Poland.
We came to the aid of our allies, who they did invade.
<< WWII was started to keep the Nazi's from taking over Poland and it ended with the USSR taking over Poland.
And I thought it was to prevent Nazi Germany from conquering all of Europe. >>
Sounds pre-emptive. If only FDR had cared that communists conquered half of Europe, and most of Asia, and most of central America, and most of Africa.................
It's much easier to look back rather than forward, but at that time, the Soviets had not.
<< Or actually bothered to read a view of history that didn't come from a public school.
On that we can agree. The view you've expressed did not come from the public school system. >>
Yes, you rarely get fact based history in the public schools.
On that, we disagree. Revisionists always hate mainstream academic history.
Having said that, it's off to bed for me, so perhaps we can play again tomorrow.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
Apparently the parents weren't self policing.>>
Do you live in your own plastic bubble? You are arguing the same crap that 19th century rich industrialist were spewing out. Have you ever considered that most working families in the 1800s and early 1900s were bearly capable of supporting themselves when both parents were working full time? In 1901 (Canada), the estimated cost of living was $13.38 a week, but at best the the average male worker would make $8.25 a week. Now do you understand why children needed to work inorder to supplement the families income? If anyone wants to see the results of unrestrained capitalism take a look at the working conditions of the 19th century.
<< Both Roosevelt and Churchill recognized the reality of Soviet power in 1945.
The difference is, Churchill actually wanted to do something about it.>>
Have you heard of the Moscow accords? Churchill "gave" Stalin free rein in the Baltic states, Bulgaria, Romania and Yugoslavia in return for a Soviet promise not to intervene in Greece. Before you say that Stalin did intervene in Greece note that there are national socialist movements that are not endorsed by the Soviet Union. A good example would be the Chinese Communist Party, Tito's partisans and how Stalin dissoved the Communist International in 1941