25 ms·
Are you claiming that there was starvation in the 19th C depressions, England / USA? This would be news historians. Besides differences in government response,
by iguy 9y ago
Are you claiming that there was starvation in the 19th C depressions, England / USA? This would be news historians.
Besides differences in government response, the other big difference was that employment had become more secure, more long-term, more Henry Ford and less Charles Dickens. You could indeed argue that this made it more serious. Compare a 20% drop in employment which meant 4 days a week for everyone (because they were all casual, factory or farm) vs 1/5 of workers (who thought they had jobs for life) being unemployed for years.
- coliveira 9y ago> Are you claiming that there was starvation in the 19th C depressions I am not claiming nothing of this. But everyone knows the huge toil of the great depression on poor workers. The only reason why the new deal was enacted is that people were on the verge of revolt. If the recession had been any worse, there would be blood on the streets and even more people would starve to death, and possibly the US government would be overthrow by communists who were very active at the time. That's the fundamental reason why these silly ideas pushed by conservatives never come to fruition: a completely free market is guaranteed to lead to revolution sooner or later.
- iguy 9y agoOh I don't doubt that the new deal was politically a good idea. Blood on the streets is bad for one's re-election prospects. And communist overthrows certainly produce lots of blood. I'm just dubious of claims that it was economically a great idea, especially in the long run. This seems to be unclear from the data, looking back from a safe distance.