<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: History Repeating Itself</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fitsnews.com/2009/04/09/history-repeating-itself/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fitsnews.com/2009/04/09/history-repeating-itself/</link>
	<description>Politics, Sports and Pop Culture</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 18:46:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric</title>
		<link>http://www.fitsnews.com/2009/04/09/history-repeating-itself/#comment-51499</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2009 13:33:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fitsnews.com/?p=18349#comment-51499</guid>
		<description>Pat,

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/budget.php
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2008/sheets/hist01z1.xls (raw data)
His first year in office he had 3.6 billion in expenditures and by the time he left office it was 6.5 billion in expenditures (81% increase over 4 years).  Not to mention that this gov&#039;t growth was while the economy was shrinking.

Prove to me otherwise.

The facts are this: If gov&#039;t spending could simply fix the economy we would NEVER see recessions and depressions because the gov&#039;t would just spend money.  And if gov&#039;t spending was so great, why not tax Americans 100% and just let the gov&#039;t spend all the money.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pat,</p>
<p><a href="http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/budget.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/budget.php</a><br />
<a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2008/sheets/hist01z1.xls" rel="nofollow">http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2008/sheets/hist01z1.xls</a> (raw data)<br />
His first year in office he had 3.6 billion in expenditures and by the time he left office it was 6.5 billion in expenditures (81% increase over 4 years).  Not to mention that this gov&#8217;t growth was while the economy was shrinking.</p>
<p>Prove to me otherwise.</p>
<p>The facts are this: If gov&#8217;t spending could simply fix the economy we would NEVER see recessions and depressions because the gov&#8217;t would just spend money.  And if gov&#8217;t spending was so great, why not tax Americans 100% and just let the gov&#8217;t spend all the money.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pat Hendrix</title>
		<link>http://www.fitsnews.com/2009/04/09/history-repeating-itself/#comment-51454</link>
		<dc:creator>Pat Hendrix</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2009 00:52:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fitsnews.com/?p=18349#comment-51454</guid>
		<description>Eric,

The idea that Hoover was a &quot;big spender&quot; is so ridiculous it&#039;s laughable. He would never have conceded that. I could give you rea facts, not wimpering campaign excuses from Hoover to prove my point, but I&#039;m guessing you can look them up on your own.

Second, the rise in unemployment in 1937 coincided with - now hold your hat - a downturn in government spending and drastic scaling back of the New Deal to counter deficits. There were also some other things going in 1939 if you remember. Some of our biggest trading partners were preoccupied with something other than fiscal policy. In any event, it was war mobilization that finally ended the Depression. Guess what - that was government spending, too.

Face it, nearly all of the recovery of the U.S. economy prior to 1942 was due to monetary expansion. The New Deal was an enormous success. Hoover&#039;s policies, which you can find right here in SC, were a failure. Those are facts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Eric,</p>
<p>The idea that Hoover was a &#8220;big spender&#8221; is so ridiculous it&#8217;s laughable. He would never have conceded that. I could give you rea facts, not wimpering campaign excuses from Hoover to prove my point, but I&#8217;m guessing you can look them up on your own.</p>
<p>Second, the rise in unemployment in 1937 coincided with &#8211; now hold your hat &#8211; a downturn in government spending and drastic scaling back of the New Deal to counter deficits. There were also some other things going in 1939 if you remember. Some of our biggest trading partners were preoccupied with something other than fiscal policy. In any event, it was war mobilization that finally ended the Depression. Guess what &#8211; that was government spending, too.</p>
<p>Face it, nearly all of the recovery of the U.S. economy prior to 1942 was due to monetary expansion. The New Deal was an enormous success. Hoover&#8217;s policies, which you can find right here in SC, were a failure. Those are facts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric</title>
		<link>http://www.fitsnews.com/2009/04/09/history-repeating-itself/#comment-51412</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2009 17:14:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fitsnews.com/?p=18349#comment-51412</guid>
		<description>Pat, maybe you need some more facts.  Hoover was a big spender and here is a quote from him in 1932.

&quot;We might have done nothing. That would have been utter ruin. Instead we met the situation with proposals to private business and to Congress of the most gigantic program of economic defense and counterattack ever evolved in the history of the Republic.&quot;

Another Fact: Unemployment was 17% in 1939

Gov&#039;t spending = decade of poor performance.  You can&#039;t deny those facts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pat, maybe you need some more facts.  Hoover was a big spender and here is a quote from him in 1932.</p>
<p>&#8220;We might have done nothing. That would have been utter ruin. Instead we met the situation with proposals to private business and to Congress of the most gigantic program of economic defense and counterattack ever evolved in the history of the Republic.&#8221;</p>
<p>Another Fact: Unemployment was 17% in 1939</p>
<p>Gov&#8217;t spending = decade of poor performance.  You can&#8217;t deny those facts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pat Hendrix</title>
		<link>http://www.fitsnews.com/2009/04/09/history-repeating-itself/#comment-51404</link>
		<dc:creator>Pat Hendrix</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2009 14:19:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fitsnews.com/?p=18349#comment-51404</guid>
		<description>1929 - 1933, GDP contracts by 25 percent. Unemployment at 25 percent. Personal income drops from 90 billion to 50 billion. 20 percent of banks fail. Industrial output is halved. There is a Republican president and Congress.

1934 the New Deal begins. In four years, all losses from the crash are recovered and GDP has recovered to pre-depression levels. Industrial production had also recovered. Economy grows by 10.8 percent in 1934, 8.9 percent in 1935, 13 percent in 1936 and 5.1 percent in 1937. Unemployment had dropped below 10 percent.

Facts versus cartoons. I&#039;ll go with the facts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1929 &#8211; 1933, GDP contracts by 25 percent. Unemployment at 25 percent. Personal income drops from 90 billion to 50 billion. 20 percent of banks fail. Industrial output is halved. There is a Republican president and Congress.</p>
<p>1934 the New Deal begins. In four years, all losses from the crash are recovered and GDP has recovered to pre-depression levels. Industrial production had also recovered. Economy grows by 10.8 percent in 1934, 8.9 percent in 1935, 13 percent in 1936 and 5.1 percent in 1937. Unemployment had dropped below 10 percent.</p>
<p>Facts versus cartoons. I&#8217;ll go with the facts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

