Presidents of United States without the great depression

Seems to me what you'd need is a president who is both business-friendly and financially astute in his own right to get legislation through to rein in the madness of Wall Street at the time (e.g., the extremely small margins used) and impose some measure of sanity. If he could get nominated and elected, Charles Dawes would be ideal for the situation.

Too bad he alienated Coolidge so early on in his tenure as VP; had he not, he might have been able to advocate some sort of regulatory legislation (a proto-SEC, perhaps) in addition to the Dawes Plan.
 
Threads like this make me laugh because of the silly assumptions people make regarding the actions or policies of particular leaders. For example, Hoover grew government and regulated the economy more than Coolidge shrunk government and withdrew the government from regulation of the economy. Yet, the same sort of tripe suggesting an opposite version of events is oft-repeated, and explains quite alot about the present state of discourse in the United States.
 
Threads like this make me laugh because of the silly assumptions people make regarding the actions or policies of particular leaders. For example, Hoover grew government and regulated the economy more than Coolidge shrunk government and withdrew the government from regulation of the economy. Yet, the same sort of tripe suggesting an opposite version of events is oft-repeated, and explains quite alot about the present state of discourse in the United States.

I have a few analysises here bringing that Obama is sadly mimicking republicans on a few details, deregulation and all. Tax cuts. So on.
 

MAlexMatt

Banned
Simple. The Progressives' work with regulating big business was rolled back by the hyper-conservative Coolidge. He should be the Tea Party's Deity, not Reagan.
"The man who builds a factory builds a temple, that the man who works there worships there, and to each is due, not scorn and blame, but reverence and praise."
That's a Coolidge quote. The Free Markets were so free, there was no oversight, and thus the Depression wasn't prevented.

I just mean specifically which regulations were 'rolled back' which subsequently caused the Depression?
 
I have a few analysises here bringing that Obama is sadly mimicking republicans on a few details, deregulation and all. Tax cuts. So on.

How is this at all relevant to the discussion at hand, regardless of whether or not your contention is fair or accurate. (To me, Obama is very much the "Third Way" proponent in more of a Blair than a Clinton model, but that's neither here nor there.)

On topic though, avoiding the Great Depression is easier said than done given its global reach, but another factor to consider is that this could have interesting consequences for both major U.S. parties in that they both retain for longer both progressive and conservative wings.
 

MAlexMatt

Banned
Seems to me what you'd need is a president who is both business-friendly and financially astute in his own right to get legislation through to rein in the madness of Wall Street at the time (e.g., the extremely small margins used) and impose some measure of sanity. If he could get nominated and elected, Charles Dawes would be ideal for the situation.

Too bad he alienated Coolidge so early on in his tenure as VP; had he not, he might have been able to advocate some sort of regulatory legislation (a proto-SEC, perhaps) in addition to the Dawes Plan.

I don't think even a fully fledged SEC would have been able to do much to stave off the Depression. The actual downturn began months before the stock market crash, which itself had a lot to do with markets being skittish over the debate surrounding the Smoot-Hawley Act, rather than any inherent instability like is usually assumed.
 
I don't think even a fully fledged SEC would have been able to do much to stave off the Depression. The actual downturn began months before the stock market crash, which itself had a lot to do with markets being skittish over the debate surrounding the Smoot-Hawley Act, rather than any inherent instability like is usually assumed.

I agree. Also, some of it too might have been related to Fed governance given that the institution was new and there were mainstream disagreements over how it should operate with respect to the economy more broadly.
 
In order to avoid the Great Depression, we would have to forgo the foundation of the Federal Reserve. Thus, William Taft would have to have been reelected in 1912.
 

MAlexMatt

Banned
I agree. Also, some of it too might have been related to Fed governance given that the institution was new and there were mainstream disagreements over how it should operate with respect to the economy more broadly.

Is this the point at which we roll our eyes and blame the Great Depression on the Real Bills Doctrine?
 
In order to avoid the Great Depression, we would have to forgo the foundation of the Federal Reserve. Thus, William Taft would have to have been reelected in 1912.

I'm not sure I agree. I think that the U.S. was moving toward having a central bank-like institution anyway. I think that such an institution is not itself the problem, but the mismanagement of such an institution could do considerable damage, even if it's not apparent at first.

Is this the point at which we roll our eyes and blame the Great Depression on the Real Bills Doctrine?
It certainly did not help matters.
 
My Soloution: Have Wilson lose the 1912 Democratic Primaries and replace him with a Southern Jim Crow,
Meanwhile you can have Teddy Roosevelt talk Eugene Debbs into being his running mate.

Of course I am not even sure if Debbs and Roosevelt could have run on the same ticket...
 
Top