5 ms·

the "Gilded Age" was termed after the fact by the same liberal socialists. bringing inequality isn't a bad thing. inequality emerges by necessity from a distrib

the "Gilded Age" was termed after the fact by the same liberal socialists. bringing inequality isn't a bad thing. inequality emerges by necessity from a distribution where people have choice, but that's too long to discus here. what really maters is did the quality of life of everyone go up. For example: The cost of oil was brought down by over 80%, enabling people for the first time to read at night. You are in a comfortable position to benefit from everything that 'the gilded age' brought, but don't have to face the down sides of not having it by being here.

runarberg 3y ago
It can be argued that the benefits of lower oil prices were insignificant next to the benefits of electricity infrastructure which the New Deal brought to the masses. To afford that oil, and to afford that lamp, you still had to labor day and night, even if you were only 12 years old, in such poor working conditions that dying at your job was a serious risk. To enjoy the light from the electricity of the many dams the work project of the New Deal brought, you just had to pay your taxes. The Laissez-faire capitalism of the gilded age came crashing down in a spectacular depressions, the benefits, which only some could afford, were short lived when suddenly there weren’t any jobs. The New Deal gave people back their jobs so we could again afford the luxuries of past inventions. You see. I too can spin a narrative where socialism brings all the good stuff and capitalism none.
- autokad 3y ago
  The new deal was a huge failure. only the outbreak of WW2 ended the great depression, to which socialist policies were only prolonging the pain of the great depression. Bad working conditions is not == capitalism. Soviet working conditions were not the workers paradise. Working conditions in China is still not the workers paradise. Working conditions in North Korea are not the workers paradise. Need me to go on? I can do this all day. and by the way, the oil for reading at night was only one of many many great benefits. Ford bought cars to the working class for example.

runarberg 3y ago

It can be argued that the benefits of lower oil prices were insignificant next to the benefits of electricity infrastructure which the New Deal brought to the masses. To afford that oil, and to afford that lamp, you still had to labor day and night, even if you were only 12 years old, in such poor working conditions that dying at your job was a serious risk. To enjoy the light from the electricity of the many dams the work project of the New Deal brought, you just had to pay your taxes. The Laissez-faire capitalism of the gilded age came crashing down in a spectacular depressions, the benefits, which only some could afford, were short lived when suddenly there weren’t any jobs. The New Deal gave people back their jobs so we could again afford the luxuries of past inventions. You see. I too can spin a narrative where socialism brings all the good stuff and capitalism none.

autokad 3y ago
The new deal was a huge failure. only the outbreak of WW2 ended the great depression, to which socialist policies were only prolonging the pain of the great depression. Bad working conditions is not == capitalism. Soviet working conditions were not the workers paradise. Working conditions in China is still not the workers paradise. Working conditions in North Korea are not the workers paradise. Need me to go on? I can do this all day. and by the way, the oil for reading at night was only one of many many great benefits. Ford bought cars to the working class for example.