Replies

eagleone: "There's a huge difference between 10% and 5% unemployment."

Well... first, both numbers are huge improvements over the 20% unemployment (according to your chart) in 1938.
1938 represents the New Deal's failure.
1941 represents the ramp-up to WWII.
AND, 1942's 5% unemployment is STILL more ramp-up than it is the war itself, which did not hit high-gear until 1943.

So my point still stands: FDR did not need a declaration of war to achieve the benefits of war-time production.

eagleone: "If you're off this much in your statement on unemployment, why should I take your word on anything else. "

Second, if you go back to my post #63, the unemployment graph there can easily be interpreted as saying what I posted -- that by the end of 1941, the U.S. was rapidly approaching 5%.
Your problem is, that doesn't fit your anti-FDR narrative, so naturally, you must argue against the facts.

eagleone: " You also said the US economy was doing just fine at 14% unemployment. "

No, FRiend, YOU posted that, I said no such thing.

No, I'm only saying that by 1940, as the graph shows, US employment was already the highest in history to date, the Great Depression was behind us and FDR did not need more "stimulus" from yet more increased war-time production. By 1940 the US was doing just fine economically.

I only put unemployment numbers to your statement that in 1940 the US was doing just fine economically into context.

So I’m not saying the US economy would have done as well without war as with, only that it was already on pretty good shape by end of 1941 and would have stayed good even absent Pearl Harbor.

Which is it....doing well by 1940 or 1941??

You're all over the place.

So my point still stands: FDR did not need a declaration of war to achieve the benefits of war-time production.

Yes he did.

You're not going to get the full scale ramp up and conversion of the US economy to a wartime economy just to provide aid to the UK and USSR.

1941 represents the ramp-up to WWII.

You do realize we were already beginning to ramp up defense spending in 1939 and 1940...right? Carl-Vinson act of 1940 ring a bell?

AND, 1942's 5% unemployment is STILL more ramp-up than it is the war itself, which did not hit high-gear until 1943.

1942 is due to the war and the draft. And of course it took some time for us to fully ramp up production of which we began to scale back in 44 to a degree.

Second, if you go back to my post #63, the unemployment graph there can easily be interpreted as saying what I posted -- that by the end of 1941, the U.S. was rapidly approaching 5%.

Except you said unemployment was 5% in 1940....

I'm still trying to figure out why you're supporting one of easily the worst presidents in US history who:

threatened to pack the courts

massively expanded government.