[seahorse2]

Loki,

Probably the only thing I'm sure about in life is of my own ignorance. But, that's why I ask a lot of questions. So, I ask again, if the photo essay is not representative of how the average American lived during the depression, please point me to the sources. I will say that, as a history major and having had grandparents who were migrant workers that moved from Oklahoma to California during the depression, I can say that the photo essay is representative of the way many Americans lived during that time, and it was very difficult.

Now, it was said that 4 million migrant workers was "statistically insignificant" based on the US population of 120 million people at the time. Assuming those numbers are correct, I think it is a dangerous point of view to justify poverty or pain based on whether that poverty is "statistically significant." In fact, that is the very notion which Charles Dickens confronted in his book "A Christmas Carol." If we measure the value of action or inaction, or the level of our concern, by the "statistical significance" of the number of people affected, then I would argue the HIV problem in Africa is "statistically insignificant" to the world's population and therefore we shouldn't care; the number of casualties in Iraq, on all sides, is statistically insignificant to the world's population; the number of casualties in the current Lebanese conflict is statistically insignificant to the world's population, and therefore, not important. Its a dangerous philosophical road to take, to view suffering as "statistically insignificant."

[elocs]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('seahorse2', 'L')oki,

Probably the only thing I'm sure about in life is of my own ignorance. But, that's why I ask a lot of questions. So, I ask again, if the photo essay is not representative of how the average American lived during the depression, please point me to the sources. I will say that, as a history major and having had grandparents who were migrant workers that moved from Oklahoma to California during the depression, I can say that the photo essay is representative of the way many Americans lived during that time, and it was very difficult.

Now, it was said that 4 million migrant workers was "statistically insignificant" based on the US population of 120 million people at the time. Assuming those numbers are correct, I think it is a dangerous point of view to justify poverty or pain based on whether that poverty is "statistically significant." In fact, that is the very notion which Charles Dickens confronted in his book "A Christmas Carol." If we measure the value of action or inaction, or the level of our concern, by the "statistical significance" of the number of people affected, then I would argue the HIV problem in Africa is "statistically insignificant" to the world's population and therefore we shouldn't care; the number of casualties in Iraq, on all sides, is statistically insignificant to the world's population; the number of casualties in the current Lebanese conflict is statistically insignificant to the world's population, and therefore, not important. Its a dangerous philosophical road to take, to view suffering as "statistically insignificant."

[Dreamtwister]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('swingbolder', 'O')ne thing that always strikes me when viewing photos of that era is the relative lack of fat people, compared to today.

Poor people are much fatter these days.

[Tyler_JC]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')o be fair to the Fed, we should survey factors that were contemporaneous with the end of the bull market and the coming of depression, factors over which the Fed had absolutely no control, including:

1.The enactment in 1929 of the Smoot-Hawley tariff, which led to a contraction of international trade. U.S. exports fell by two-thirds between 1930 and 1933. This was precisely the sort of policy that ought not to have been enacted at this time. Hoover wanted to protect Republican-leaning agricultural interests, and he did — at a very high price for the nation.

2. The Nazi Party's success in Germany's 1930 elections, which created havoc in the international bond market.

3. Hoover's wage policy, which was a misguided attempt — agreed to by major corporations — to keep wages from declining during a depression. Not surprisingly, this proved to be a surefire way to create unemployment.

4. Congress' raising of taxes during an economic downturn in an attempt to balance the federal budget. This increased the tax burden on citizens whose incomes were already falling. This perverse policy was followed throughout the decade of the '30s, first during Hoover's and then FDR's terms. Taxes were three times higher in 1939 than they had been in 1929: this was utterly perverse macroeconomic policy.

5. Anticipation, in 1932, that FDR would abandon the gold standard if elected, and his failure to deny that rumor during the campaign. This was also destabilizing. Of course, once elected, he did a great deal more than simply abandon the standard. His administration outlawed the private ownership of gold, and required all Americans to surrender any gold they owned.

6. A great surge in economic regulation, begun under Hoover, which grew exponentially under FDR. This spooked entrepreneurs and investors throughout the decade, aided by the capricious, back-and-forth court decisions on the regulations' constitutionality and the always-changing policies that poured forth from Washington during FDR's terms.

7. England's leaving the gold standard in 1931. This caused a gold drain from the U.S. that the Fed fought by raising the discount rate during the depression. In retrospect, it is hard to suggest that the Fed could have done anything else given the legal-institutional parameters in place at that time.

[MrBill]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dreamtwister', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('swingbolder', 'O')ne thing that always strikes me when viewing photos of that era is the relative lack of fat people, compared to today.

Poor people are much fatter these days.

[Dreamtwister]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBill', 'L')ess than one pound? How about zero in 1927?

[RonMN]

I just noticed...under the picture with the woman with her 2 children...it says

"These people had just sold their tent in order to buy food".

Holy CRAP! what a choice

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RonMN', 'I') just noticed...under the picture with the woman with her 2 children...it says

"These people had just sold their tent in order to buy food".

Holy CRAP! what a choice

[I_Like_Plants]

Good article from the Washington Post.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... &hpv=local

[wisconsin_cur]

ILP,

you got to do more to sell this! I almost passed it by but am loving it!.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')t first, people will go where they always went in times of disaster or need. Not to the Red Cross shelter, but to Wal-Mart.

For a year or so, people won't like to describe themselves as homeless. But after a while it will be impossible not to notice, in the box store parking lots, a phenomenon that will look like a 24/7 tailgate party that keeps growing: Coleman grills, ice chests, portable DVD players, hamburger buns and Special K breakfast bars. The American campout. In the Great Depression, Roosevelt saw a third of a nation ill-housed. Here you are, in an alternate reality, in the Second Great Depression, ill-housed yourself.

[deMolay]

From the time the Market crashed in Oct 1929, it took until April 1930 for the full effects to become apparent. I think what we are seeing is a synergy of more than just markets. Energy costs, food prices, money markets, debt, energy wars, climate factors etc. All acting in concert.

[Prince]

Well, it took until 1932-1933 for the market to hit a bottom and for the full effects to really set in. October 1929 was just the beginning (just like now). There were mini spikes and glimmers of hope along the way (just like now). But over time, things steadily dwindled downward (just like now).

[Delphis]

We will know shortly if this is indeed the next downtick...

D.

[Sys1]

I don't think that the 1930's great depression will keep its "great" attribute in the history books of the future, beside of course the case where history books would ceased to be published because of some major problems like say a thermonuclear war or runaway global warming ending in a massive dieoff.

[kpeavey]

The depression of the 1930's did not have digital technology to speed along transactions. It took time to process buy/sell orders. Banks used paper. I don't think even punch cards were in use at the time. Modern technology can jam up the works at lightning speeds. We can screw stuff up in a day things that used to take weeks and months to screw up.

[Eli]

kpeavey, I think you have got that right, in the 1930's everything moved at a human pace. Calculations took forever and required human input.

Now we have a system of 1 and 0s flying around at the speed of light.


We are witnessing the fall of the current economic system and it is happening a speed that is inhuman.

[deMolay]

Peavey has a strong point. Trillions of dollars are circulating the globe on the internet.

[skeptik]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kpeavey', ' ')Banks used paper. I don't think even punch cards were in use at the time.

[TreebeardsUncle]

Don't think we are going to see any depression from this credit squeeze brought on by excessive leveraging.

[AlexdeLarge]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TreebeardsUncle', 'D')on't think we are going to see any depression from this credit squeeze brought on by excessive leveraging.