Sunstein Analysis

From the point of view of New Dealers, Progressive era reforms had set up key precedents for government mediation in the economy, however, had not gone sufficiently far enough to avoid financial vulnerability. Both the Progressives and the New Dealers shared a faith in the likelihood that government could advance and improve social change. In times of helplessness and change, both the Progressives and New Dealers demanded that the government could be used to try and accomplish a measure of security and

The book “Taking Sides: Clashing Views in United States History” by Madaras, Larry and James SoRelle draws attention on controversial issues. James and Madaras wrote the book in a debate-style format, which intrigues many students, hence supporting them in enhancing their critical thinking skills. James and Madaras ensured that every issue in the book has a summary, introduction, challenge question and postscript. Therefore, the paper will focus on issue 10, which debates on whether the new deal prolonged the great depression. The great depression refers to an era in US history, which happened from 1929 to 1941 during president Franklin Delano Roosevelt era, and it made the US citizens face economic hard times. The great depression era had much overproduction, inequality in wealth distribution and over borrowing. Consequently, the president implemented the new deal with the aim of saving American citizens from the great depression. However, people had different feelings regarding the effectiveness of the new deal, which brought up the debate in the book. For example, Burton Folsom believed that the new deal was not effective because he thought that it prolonged the great depression. On the contrary, Roger Biles alleged that the new deal was effective, and it did not prolong the great depression (Madaras and James 227).

“The path to economic growth is not engineered by the government; rather, the path to economic prosperity is built by the people.” This quote relates to classical liberalism because it displays a ring wing perspective, which indicates devalued government authority in relation to aspects of individualism. Overall demonstrating the economic perspective that favours the absence of government involvement. It brings into question what the most efficient way to run an economy is, and what is the best way to manage an economy to maintain stability. Some believe that government intervention in an economy is dangerous because it adds to the nation’s overall inflation rate and national debt. Friedrich Hayek is an economic theorist supporting little

In the past, the nation’s government took the “laissez-faire” approach to dealing with the economy and/or free market affairs. The government intervened as little as possible, asserting the belief felt that if left alone, economic problems would be resolved without government interference. However, this approach was not guaranteed, and at times, the government had to put aside the “laissez-faire” approach of the past. The government had no other choice but to intervene in these instances to return balance to the economy and protect its citizens it served. The government changed both its approach and its size through programs initiated by the Industrial Revolution, New Deal programs during and following the Great Depression, and World

In FDR’s Folly: How Roosevelt and His New Deal Prolonged the Great Depression, Jim Powell discusses how Roosevelt’s New Deal actually prolonged the Great Depression and made it significantly worse economically for the people in the 1930s United States. Powell reveals a different angle of the “hero” Franklin Delano Roosevelt, his New Deal, and how he allegedly lead the United States out of the Great Depression. Throughout this book, the author analyzes the actions and repercussions of Roosevelt’s economic decisions revealing how these decisions actually made the depression significantly worse. Along with that, the author analyzes the various policies and implementations in a more in-depth way that really convinces the reader of the poor

During both the Progressive era and the New Deal era, policies as well as programs were being created in an effort to assist the American public, specifically those living in poverty. Throughout the early 1900’s Roosevelt had strayed away from the typical laissez-faire policy and decided that the people would need to be guided by the government. “Wilsonian Progressivism” had also aimed at assisting the public with his “New Freedom Program” which consisted of antitrust legislation, banking reform as well as tariff reductions. After the stock market crashed in 1929, America had fallen into a Great Depression resulting in the unemployment of millions. Newly elected Franklin D. Roosevelt decided to present his

The Great Depression is probably one of the most misunderstood events in American history. It is routinely cited, as proof that unregulated capitalism is not the best in the world, and that only a massive welfare state, huge amounts of economic regulation, and other interventions can save capitalism from itself. The Great Depression had important consequences and was a devastating event in America, however many good policies and programs became available as a result of the great depression, some of which exist even today.

Being two of the most respected and qualified academicians on public policy, Charles Murray, and Robert B. Reich have never been short of making controversial and contradicting statements which arguably serves only their interest of getting an audience. Public policy as it is has been subjected to lots of changes throughout the history leading to different reactions and opinions from different individuals. “What it means to be a Libertarian-A Personal Interpretation” written by Charles Murray, explicitly describes how the society should view the government by claiming it can help in achieving overall happiness and allowing members of the society to have a right to individual freedom when coping with the changes brought by public policy. On the other hand, Robert B. Reich’s “Aftershock the next Economy and America’s Future” talks about overcoming our problems by keeping a tier of classes. This paper discusses the contradicting views of these two writers.

This lack of complete dedication to private interest or public purpose is further displayed in Documents B and C where Hoover stresses the importance of the individual in ending the Depression while also assuring government support for job production if the situation required it. Hoover's speeches are remarkably similar to Roosevelt's speech in Document E. Here, even during the Depression, Roosevelt stressed the importance of balancing the budget unless unemployment required the government to spend money stimulating the economy. Instead of Hoover's desire to continue restricting government, Roosevelt wanted to balance the budget. The Depression created the need for government intervention and an unbalanced budget as shown in Document F. However, despite a few efforts by Hoover to create jobs, he still seemed much different than Roosevelt who insisted in 1936 that America must not go back to supporting Conservatives who protected private interest unjustly. (Document G)

Reed’s book, Great Myths of the Great Depression, attempts to argue that the stock market crash of 1929 was merely a normal economic occurrence. Instead, it was government policies enacted in response that exacerbated and prolonged the economic effects of the crash. In effect, Reed’s thesis flips the conventional view on its head: instead of being the cause, free-market capitalism would have naturally solved the issues that led to the Great Depression. Conversely, government intervention was a cause of, rather than a solution to, the economic hardships that resulted.

All of these factors put together led to inevitable mass unemployment, homelessness, and psychological scarring on people everywhere. However, the effect of the Great Depression also allowed the American economy to shift from one of supply focus to one of demand focus, as well as progressed the Democratic party in America. Nevertheless, it is important to analyze the causes to understand how American economics shape

In 1932, when Franklin Delano Roosevelt took office, the citizens of the United States had possessed sufficient time to realize that they could no longer be proud, but they must take anything they could get. Therefore, the programs set up by FDR’s New Deal program were perfect for the country at the time. These programs helped the people directly, providing relief, recovery, and reform. FDR based his plans on the philosophy of Keynesian economics, where the government spends money to make money. The government gave money and jobs to those in need, who in turn, had money to spend in the marketplace. The demand for products increased, and businesses were able to hire more workers and produce more products, as well as pay more money in taxes. FDR’s plans worked because they gave money not to those who would take advantage of the government, but to those who would use it in the way the government intended it to be used. During FDR’s first term in office alone, the unemployment rate dropped 4%. Because of FDR’s success in bringing the country out of the Depression, I give him an A.

This established the idea that people would become “self-reliant”. Individual success was encouraged and government intervention was to be kept minimal. People aspired to achieve these objectives, for example, earning respect, conquering individual goals and measuring success by gaining material status. Laissez Faire was a philosophy used by previous conservative US Presidents, which also promoted minimal government involvement. As America became more industrialised the system faced many problems. The lack of government participation in both of these theories is what led to the American government only coming to the realisation of an economic crisis when it was too

The rule of the market by liberating free enterprise or private enterprise resulted in greater openness to international trade and investment. Additionally, the rule of the market meant reducing wages by deunionizing workers and eliminating worker’s rights that had been won over many years. It also meant no more price control and the total freedom of movement for capital, goods, and services (Nylund, 2016). People were convinced that having an unregulated market was the best way to increase economic growth, which would ultimately benefit everyone. Although, the rule of the market was meant to have money “trickle-down” to the poor, it did not truly benefit the people at the bottom. The very wealthy would often keep the money they were making instead of letting it trickle down. To illustrate, the after-tax incomes in the U.S. between 1979 and 2006 rose by 256% for the top 1% of households, while they rose 21% for the middle fifth of households and 11% for the bottom fifth of households (Finn, Nybell & Shook, 2010). This means that the

Since the beginning of time people have been affected by their income and ability to accumulate wealth. People live their lives spending or saving money based on their own expectations of what the economy might do. For hundreds of years we have studied how the economic decisions of individuals and governments affect the welfare of society as a whole. John Maynard Keynes introduced a new economic theory that emphasized deficit spending to help struggling economies recover. Keynesian economics revolutionized the traditional thinking in the science of economics. His ideas and theories were deemed radical for his time but were later enacted by some of the largest governments in the world including the United States during the Great Depression. President Franklin Roosevelt enacted the New Deal in an attempt to stimulate the economy through government spending. In this paper I will be giving background to the history economics, the Great Depression, the New Deal, the development of Keynesian Economics. This paper will focus on analyzing the following question: In an attempt to address high unemployment and economic contraction, was Roosevelt’s The New Deal efficacious in stimulating the economy and ending the Great Depression?