1) The money growth fell behind manufacturing growth for the entire decade; and the U.S. maintained a balance of trade surplus or, at the worst, was even, throughout the 20s;
False. If U.S. had balance of trade surplus throughout '20s as you contend, then by definition (Econ 101) money supply grew through this trade.
2) in addition to that, we had net inflows of gold, for which the Fed was to pump up the money supply proportionally---it didn't;
False again. By definition if the U.S. had inflows of gold going into their vaults as you contend, then they printed more money to redeem the gold with. Or, is it your wild contention that citizens made DONATIONS of gold to the government. Point in fact U.S. money supply growth was 60% in the Roaring 20s. It was in fact reckless. It was done to help bail out England from WWI.
3) there is NO scholarship that can identify a stock "bubble" as defined by stock prices wildly out of kilter with company values and/or reasonable expectations. The very stocks that were soaring were the same companies that were booming---utilities, cars, radios, and so on. What's interesting is that several economists have asserted a bubble existed, but as of 2000 when I last surveyed the scholarship on this, there were not studies that found a bubble and two that found exactly the opposite;
False. See my earlier point on money supply growth which led to the bubble and a host of malinvestments. True there were companies that were booming during this time but once every household which had electricity bought a radio, washing machine and car - where were the new customers supposed to come from after that? Hence a business downturn was due.
4) the Fed allowed the money supply to plunge 1/3 after the stock market crash, and failed to perform the role of lender of last resort for crucial big banks like Bank of United States and the big Nashville bank (whose name escapes me).
False. The Fed choked off money supply growth and raised interest rates starting in 1928. In fact, starting in January 1928 the Fed raised rates four times from 3.5% to 6% thus setting the stage for the market downturn. The smart money guys like Joe Kennedy and Bernard Baruch saw the money supply contraction taking place and got their money out of the market well in front of the crash. You did get one thing right in your entire post. The Fed did continue constraining money supply growth right through 1933. I'll give you credit for that. LOL
You really don't understand this at all, do you? We had foreign trade balances where governments made payments to us to cover the debt in securities. Again, this did not automatically result in "more dollars." It would only do so if the Comptroller printed up more money, which did not happen.
Wrong. You have no evidence, only some crackpot theory that there was a stock market bubble. Find some evidence. Find some actual studies that support anything you say.
4) You agree with me. Thank you. That's exactly what I said in the whole post: the Fed did NOT keep up the money supply. Since you want to cite Econ 101, find me ANY measure of the money supply in the 1920s. You'll see they all fell; that prices fell steadily---not just after 1928. In fact, they fell since 1920, by a lot.
As for your notion about "big money" guys somehow getting off scott free, guess that didn't apply to Samuel Insull or thousands of other millionaires who lost everything.