NY Times Story on Pilot Population Decline

("601XL Builder" wrote)
FDR's "New Deal" didn't pull the US out of the depression. WWII did.


My understanding of Depression era events hold that 'recovery'(?) was well
underway by mid 1939.

....depending, of course, what yardstick you use.


Montblack

"Montblack" wrote

My understanding of Depression era events hold that 'recovery'(?) was well
underway by mid 1939.

...depending, of course, what yardstick you use.

And one could probably argue that, by that time, we were starting to build
up the military machine for the upcoming war.
--
Jim in NC

"Montblack" wrote in message
...
("601XL Builder" wrote)
FDR's "New Deal" didn't pull the US out of the depression. WWII did.


My understanding of Depression era events hold that 'recovery'(?) was well
underway by mid 1939.

...depending, of course, what yardstick you use.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average did not return to the level it held in
October, 1929 until:

a) 1939
b) 1943
c) 1948
d) 1951
e) 1954

Adjusted for inflation, the DJIA did not recover it's full value until:

a) 1943
b) 1949
c) 1954
d) 1958
e) 1962

Matt Barrow wrote:
"Montblack" wrote in message
...
("601XL Builder" wrote)
FDR's "New Deal" didn't pull the US out of the depression. WWII did.


My understanding of Depression era events hold that 'recovery'(?)
was well underway by mid 1939.

...depending, of course, what yardstick you use.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average did not return to the level it held
in October, 1929 until:

a) 1939
b) 1943
c) 1948
d) 1951
e) 1954

Adjusted for inflation, the DJIA did not recover it's full value
until:
a) 1943
b) 1949
c) 1954
d) 1958
e) 1962


I know, I know.








































e
e

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
Matt Barrow wrote:
"Montblack" wrote in message
...
("601XL Builder" wrote)
FDR's "New Deal" didn't pull the US out of the depression. WWII did.


My understanding of Depression era events hold that 'recovery'(?)
was well underway by mid 1939.

...depending, of course, what yardstick you use.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average did not return to the level it held
in October, 1929 until:

a) 1939
b) 1943
c) 1948
d) 1951
e) 1954

Adjusted for inflation, the DJIA did not recover it's full value
until:
a) 1943
b) 1949
c) 1954
d) 1958
e) 1962


I know, I know.






























e
e

"Very good! You win a cookie" - Don Rickles

("Matt Barrow" wrote)
The Dow Jones Industrial Average did not return to the level it held in
October, 1929 until:


1929 was a bubble, built on a bubble - much like Tokyo in the mid 80's.

The farm economy was hurting before The Crash.

IIRC, its spiral started in 1926-27(?). That would put it almost 3 years
ahead of Wall Street's little party. I'm not sure the exact causes: money
squeeze? land value? crop prices? labor costs? Mississippi River Flood?

That said, I've seen/read a number of pieces that said, if you didn't owe
the bank, lived on a farm, and/or had some cash handy, the depression was
almost a non-event ....for the most part. g


Montblack

Montblack wrote:
("601XL Builder" wrote)
FDR's "New Deal" didn't pull the US out of the depression. WWII did.


My understanding of Depression era events hold that 'recovery'(?) was
well underway by mid 1939.

...depending, of course, what yardstick you use.


Montblack

A recovery had indeed started by '39. But military production for sale, lend
and lease started before that. It is also not 100% clear that the recovery
would have held had the war not happened.

The government generally can't spend a country out of an economic downturn
without long term negative effects. Historically the one exception to this
is military spending. Since it tends to build both a nations economic and
political position. The one glaring example where this wasn't true was the
USSR 1980s. One where it was true is the USA 1980s.

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
Montblack wrote:
("601XL Builder" wrote)
FDR's "New Deal" didn't pull the US out of the depression. WWII did.


My understanding of Depression era events hold that 'recovery'(?) was
well underway by mid 1939.

...depending, of course, what yardstick you use.


Montblack

A recovery had indeed started by '39. But military production for sale,
lend and lease started before that. It is also not 100% clear that the
recovery would have held had the war not happened.

http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1262


The government generally can't spend a country out of an economic downturn
without long term negative effects. Historically the one exception to this
is military spending. Since it tends to build both a nations economic and
political position. The one glaring example where this wasn't true was the
USSR 1980s. One where it was true is the USA 1980s.

That's "Myth #3".

Matt Barrow wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
Montblack wrote:
("601XL Builder" wrote)
FDR's "New Deal" didn't pull the US out of the depression. WWII
did.


My understanding of Depression era events hold that 'recovery'(?)
was well underway by mid 1939.

...depending, of course, what yardstick you use.


Montblack

A recovery had indeed started by '39. But military production for
sale, lend and lease started before that. It is also not 100% clear
that the recovery would have held had the war not happened.

http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1262


The government generally can't spend a country out of an economic
downturn without long term negative effects. Historically the one
exception to this is military spending. Since it tends to build both
a nations economic and political position. The one glaring example
where this wasn't true was the USSR 1980s. One where it was true is
the USA 1980s.

That's "Myth #3".

You are going to have to explain that. III in the the link you posted was
talking about wages.

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
Matt Barrow wrote:


A recovery had indeed started by '39. But military production for
sale, lend and lease started before that. It is also not 100% clear
that the recovery would have held had the war not happened.

http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1262


The government generally can't spend a country out of an economic
downturn without long term negative effects. Historically the one
exception to this is military spending. Since it tends to build both
a nations economic and political position. The one glaring example
where this wasn't true was the USSR 1980s. One where it was true is
the USA 1980s.

That's "Myth #3".

You are going to have to explain that. III in the the link you posted was
talking about wages.

The myths I'm talking about are not in the link above.

The first three myths a
Myth #1: The consumer is two-thirds of the economy: as long as she is
spending, we can avoid recession.
(Hint: Production (and only production), is 100% of the economy)
Myth #2: Lower interest rates and easy credit will promote recovery.
Myth #3: Government spending can promote growth.

#3 includes military spending. I don't know what "historically" you are
talking about, because the 1980's in the US military spending DID smother
the Soviet Union, but it certainly did NOT build our economy.

There were four big REAL (not inflation driven numbers) spurts in the US
economy in the last 105 years: 1922, 1962, 1982, and 2003. Can you see a
pattern in those dates?


--
Matt Barrow
Performace Homes, LLC.
Cheyenne, WY