The 1946 Republican Congress...

[unregistered]

 

[richard_daily]

I thought this was going to be a thread about the last time you got laid.

 

[overthebow]

Cut the federal budget between by 47% between 1946-48. Their policies took the country from a 31% deficit to a 40% surplus by 1948. Despite all the cries of impending doom and disaster, it was accomplished and although the Pubs were thrown out in 48, the economy boomed in the 50s because of it. Keep in mind that 10 million government employees were fired by Harry Truman after the war.

This must be the Fox talking point of the day.

Did Fox enumerate the major differences between then and now?

 

[islandman]

Cut the federal budget between by 47% between 1946-48. Their policies took the country from a 31% deficit to a 40% surplus by 1948. Despite all the cries of impending doom and disaster, it was accomplished and although the Pubs were thrown out in 48, the economy boomed in the 50s because of it. Keep in mind that 10 million government employees were fired by Harry Truman after the war.

This analysis falls short and understates the impact a devastated Europe and Japan - whose insatiable appetite for goods to rebuild their respective geographies - had in driving America's economic growth during that time period.

 

[John Doe]

This must be the Fox talking point of the day.

Did Fox enumerate the major differences between then and now?

Unless basic economics has changed by such a drastic degree that spending less no longer means having more income left over or at least borrowing less, then it doesn't really matter.

 

[Drixxx]

This analysis falls short and understates the impact a devastated Europe and Japan had in driving America's economic growth during that time period.

Yeah but 10 million Americans got fired! He's probably rubbing one out right now just thinking about it.

 

[John Doe]

This analysis falls short and understates the impact a devastated Europe and Japan - whose insatiable appetite for goods to rebuild their respective geographies - had in driving America's economic growth during that time period.

Did the US give away all those goods to Europe and Japan?

 

[overthebow]

Unless basic economics has changed by such a drastic degree that spending less no longer means having more income left over or at least borrowing less, then it doesn't really matter.

This analysis falls short and understates the impact a devastated Europe and Japan - whose insatiable appetite for goods to rebuild their respective geographies - had in driving America's economic growth during that time period.

Advantage: islandman

 

[John Doe]

Advantage: islandman

Not unless the US gave away all those goods. If not then you have to figure in the extra income from selling said goods.

 

[unregistered]

 

[islandman]

Not unless the US gave away all those goods. If not then you have to figure in the extra income from selling said goods.

The entire economic 'pie' got bigger, driven in large measure by exports. That's the part that you're missing too.

 

[richard_daily]

Not at all. I actually brought it up a month or so ago.

The difference is they went ahead and cut 47% of the federal budget and today we say we can cut 1%, which of course is utter bullshit.

Gee, maybe it's because WW2 ended, and the defense budget could be cut back tremendously????

Nah, that couldn't be it.... that would make too much sense.

 

[overthebow]

So, V'man, you good with the tax structure that was in place at that time?

 

[Loring2]

Did the US give away all those goods to Europe and Japan?

Essentially yes ... Europe especially was devastated ... learn about the Marshal PLan

 

[unregistered]

 

[overthebow]

Nope, they tried to reduce it too but Truman vetoed it, the House overrode and the Senate Sustained the veto.

You can't have one without the other. The revenue stream that came in was the one that was in place, not the one you want.

WTF?

 

[Peregrinator]

Cut the federal budget between by 47% between 1946-48. Their policies took the country from a 31% deficit to a 40% surplus by 1948. Despite all the cries of impending doom and disaster, it was accomplished and although the Pubs were thrown out in 48, the economy boomed in the 50s because of it. Keep in mind that 10 million government employees were fired by Harry Truman after the war.

Vette, will you please enumerate the cuts that were made? Which programs and by what percentage each?

 

[Luk]

Cut the federal budget between by 47% between 1946-48. Their policies took the country from a 31% deficit to a 40% surplus by 1948. Despite all the cries of impending doom and disaster, it was accomplished and although the Pubs were thrown out in 48, the economy boomed in the 50s because of it. Keep in mind that 10 million government employees were fired by Harry Truman after the war.

This reads like Republicans saying the U.S. flourished under Clinton due to H.W.'s policies but is failing now under Obama and not placing any blame on W. The Hypocrisy of the Right, indeed.

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[islandman]

It stands to reason if the revenue was the same and the government spending was cut by 47% there would be a surplus as I stated. If the government winds up with a 40% surplus, taxpayers are paying too much tax.

It works as a mathematical precept, sure, but in real life, that's hardly ever the case.

In fact, you sound oddly like someone in academia who has never experienced real life...

 

[SleepingWarrior]

This analysis falls short and understates the impact a devastated Europe and Japan - whose insatiable appetite for goods to rebuild their respective geographies - had in driving America's economic growth during that time period.

So the lesson to be learned is that we should carpet bomb Europe and Japan while nuking our main competitor China?

 

[Wrong Element]

Cut the federal budget between by 47% between 1946-48. Their policies took the country from a 31% deficit to a 40% surplus by 1948. Despite all the cries of impending doom and disaster, it was accomplished and although the Pubs were thrown out in 48, the economy boomed in the 50s because of it. Keep in mind that 10 million government employees were fired by Harry Truman after the war.

Winding down the largest effort ever undertaken by any government will tend to lead to a major cut in the federal budget, yes.

 

[islandman]

So the lesson to be learned is that we should carpet bomb Europe and Japan while nuking our main competitor China?

That and we should tune in to vette for complete analyses of incomplete scenarios.

 

[Peregrinator]

No, obviously 47% of the federal budget is more typing than I have a lifetime for and Lit has space. The number is quite accurate and the budget info is available if you want to research it. Those cuts took place over a two year period.

Fair enough; my request was unreasonable. Maybe I can ask a couple specifics.

How much did they cut defense?

How much did they cut energy-company subsidies?

Any idea?