Main Causes of the Great Depression.

[Sharon]

The Great Depression was the worst economic slump ever in U.S. history, and one which spread to virtually all of the industrialized world. The depression began in late 1929 and lasted for about a decade. Many factors played a role in bringing about the depression; however, the main cause for the Great Depression was the combination of the greatly unequal distribution of wealth throughout the 1920's, and the extensive stock market speculation that took place during the latter part that same decade. The maldistribution of wealth in the 1920's existed on many levels. Money was distributed disparately between the rich and the middle-class, between industry and agriculture within the United States, and between the U.S. and Europe. This imbalance of wealth created an unstable economy. The excessive speculation in the late 1920's kept the stock market artificially high, but eventually lead to large market crashes. These market crashes, combined with the maldistribution of wealth, caused the American economy to capsize.

This sure sounds like what is happening now to us in 2008 with the unequal distribution of wealth and extensive stock market speculation (oil speculation especially).

[dpetty]

One of the root causes of the Great Depression was due to a housing crash in Florida during 1928-29, sound familiar?

[Bernardd]

I have a hard time with this "unequal distribution of wealth" excuse as being a catalyst for the Great Depression. The GP lasted as long as it did BECAUSE the government continued to expand, thus taking capital from the rich in order to spread it around.

The wage controls. The price controls. ANd of course the Smoot Hawley tariff are (in my opinion) the major culprits. In fact, it was the Smoot Hawley tariff that lead to the market crash.

As usual, too much government is the big problem.

[steve53]

Wow!
That was fast! :thinking
First we have the Karl Marx version of why the Great Depression, :idunnothen - the fix is in!:scratch

[Issachar]

There is some very good info with further links here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Depression).

There are various scenerios discussed and some of all of them are very true for today. Imho, another great depression is inevitable due to how fiat economies work. As I've often stated, all fiat currencies eventually reach their intrinsic value; zero. Seriously consider the meaning of the word, "intrinsic". What is happening today is not "just another news item". It will not just "eventually work itself out because it always does." There is unprecedented (seriously consider that word too) manipulation of the economy. In a free market system, I would agree, literally 100% agree, that "it will work itself out". I would agree because it is intrinsic to a free market system to correct itself.

Now before anyone hollers that we DO have a free market sytem, cosider this: There is an element of free market in any system and yes, I would include communist economics in there with the "any system". The ratio of that element to the overall is what matters. There is a point critical, that when reached, will tip the economy over. Again, imho, the U.S. economy may have tipped over by now had it not been for the technological advancements (especially globally networked computer systems) of this day and age. The international bankers are well able to accomplish their goals almost instantly and thereby, keep things going longer. The problem is, the longer the artificial manipulatin goes on, the worse it is when the inevitable happens. It will be so much worse, imho, that it will likely usher in a global economic system that eventually will be turned into the sytem of the ac.

Psalms 70:
4 *Let all those that seek thee rejoice and be glad in thee: and let such as love thy salvation say continually, Let God be magnified.
5 *But I am poor and needy: make haste unto me, O God: thou art my help and my deliverer; O LORD, make no tarrying.

Issachar

[BoxerHoo]

McCain is still..
1. Pro-Choice
2. FOR tax cuts
3. Pro-vouchers
4. FOR winning in Iraq
5. FOR off-shore drilling (though I wish he'd reconsider ANWR)
6. FOR conservative Supreme Court Justices
7. FOR traditional marriage
8. has changed his emphasis on immigration to one that secures the borders FIRST.
9. ANTI pork spending and ear marks


Thus, aside from his original immigration policy (which he has sinced abandoned), McCain-Feingold (f. reform) and McCain Kennedy (education) he has 9 acceptable policy positions and 2 unnacceptable ones.

I'm not sure how you guys define "conservative," but McCain will work for me.

Amen to that. I agree that there are a lot of things going on today that do not make sense, but the endless conspiracy theories are tiring. It couldn't be that a good amount of Conservatives like myself thought that McCain, with his independent support, would be the only candidate that could actually defeat Obama and/or Hillary. Look at the polls folks, McCain is closing quickly and does stand a chance. But, the unfortunate thing is that a good deal of Conservatives will stay home and all but guarantee a win for Obama, not realizing the implications of doing so. McCain can only be President for so long, but the Supreme Court appointments is the issue worth voting for FAR beyond anything else. Those who stay home (I'm not saying anyone in this thread will), can say NOTHING when Obama appoints Judges who ruin everything Conservatives have worked for!

[Issachar]

Wow, two threads in one. I guess that is one way to save space? :aha

Boxerhoo, what "conspiracy" is there against McCain? He's not THAT old that he could have caused the Great Depression. :lol2

Windtalker, no one is a "zero"; whatever that was supposed to mean. ???

Issachar

[steve53]

How did this thread get started again?:scratch


:doh I remember!

Everybody should have an equal amount of stuff - or not:scratch:idunno:doh:twitch

[Bernardd]

It is interesting how this all started in regards to McCain getting the nomination. We had Romney, Rudy, Huck, Paul, Fred, and Duncan.

What I find really lacking with the conversation is the fact that so few candidate have military experience. Aside from Duncan Hunter (whose military record is, I think, the most impressive) why were all these guys so unwilling to serve?

I understand military experience is NOT a requirement for office, but while we're engaged in a bloody conflict, I for one am MORE than convicted on electing someone who understands war and (more importantly) soldier mentality.

For instance, Truman understood all too well what war was about (being a WWI vet) and how important it is to support the troops. THus he dropped the bomb, won the war, and saved countless AMERICAN lives (as well as Japanese).

And so I can't help but stand in awe at McCain's experience and knowledge of the current situation. (as well as Duncan Hunter's). Granted, Vietnam and IRaq are different, but clearly McCain has a much greater understand than all the rest (not including Hunter).

Again, military experience is not a requirement for the highest office, but it should be. If they don't have the time to "serve," why should we expect them to "serve"?

[Issachar]

Steve53, your "Karl Marx" remark didn't miss me. :) (I agreed with it)

Many factors played a role in bringing about the depression; however, the main cause for the Great Depression was the combination of the greatly unequal distribution of wealth throughout the 1920's, and the extensive stock market speculation that took place during the latter part that same decade. The maldistribution of wealth in the 1920's existed on many levels. Money was distributed disparately between the rich and the middle-class, between industry and agriculture within the United States, and between the U.S. and Europe. This imbalance of wealth created an unstable economy. The excessive speculation in the late 1920's kept the stock market artificially high, but eventually lead to large market crashes. These market crashes, combined with the maldistribution of wealth, caused the American economy to capsize.

This sure sounds like what is happening now to us in 2008 with the unequal distribution of wealth ... Sharon, could you please clarify a couple things for me? One, is what you posted, quoted here, your words or someone elses? Right now I'm assuming yours since there is no link? If yours, I need to ask what you mean by "equal/unequal distribution of wealth". Are you saying things just naturally went that route and it is merely an observation? Are you saying that someone (presumably government?) should "equally distribute" wealth, which could only be accomplished via forcefully taking it from those that have it? But even then, the "takers" wouldn't redistribute it all ... they would keep some (a lot?) for their efforts. As you can see, I need clarification on this because reading many other posts by you, I don't believe you would want what it seems you're saying in this thread. Besides, should the government confiscate the wealth of some and distribute it equally among all, in a relatively short time, things would be right back to how they are. There are folks that are thrifty, would set up businesses and eventually make a profit and accumulate wealth and there are folks who would totally squander it since something has less value to someone if they did not work for it. Then there would be the majority that would just work, buy from various businesses and just go on through life.

Imho, "equitable" needs to be looked at from a biblical perspective. Many will be allowed by God to have wealth.

Deuteronomy 8:
17 *And thou say in thine heart, My power and the might of mine hand hath gotten me this wealth.
18 *But thou shalt remember the LORD thy God: for it is he that giveth thee power to get wealth, ...

It is what one does with wealth that determines the good of that wealth. If one is "of the world", they will generally use wealth as a means of getting more. That may be partly in the form of creating jobs by starting or expanding business and thereby get more wealth ... the jobs created is just a means to their end but still benefits those with the job. In other words, the jobs created is a side issue. If someone is not "of this world" but rather is born again and is a new creation in Christ, then they may use wealth to create jobs and help people and the increased profit is a side issue .. which will likely be used to create even more. So even though on the surface, it all looks the same, God looks on the heart.

Issachar