Obama Vs. Limbaugh Vs. GOP

[KinkaidAlum]

What's a rush limbaugh and why is it in a hurry?

[west20th]

Why can't Rush say what he thinks? I totally get it, Obama's camp wants to make the other half of America think that the GOP is hoping he fails. Newsflash, WE ARE ! Not to forsake the country, but to show that Obama never had the answers either. Wake up, it is up to US to get America going, NOT the Govt. who keeps throwing good money after bad. Sorry to say this Crunch, but your company is a TOTAL turd of a company, and needs to get scrubbed in a nice big Chap. 11. Not have the Obama minions throw more money at it. Looks like it is time to break out the old Jeep signature again.

No no.....we want Rush to keep on talking. Maybe he can run with Sarah Palin in 2012 and kill the GOP once and for all. Ah, just dreaming, we really need two strong parties and the GOP is swirling down the toilet faster then the economy. Youse guys really need to get your act together.

[Jeebus]

No no.....we want Rush to keep on talking. Maybe he can run with Sarah Palin in 2012 and kill the GOP once and for all. Ah, just dreaming, we really need two strong parties and the GOP is swirling down the toilet faster then the economy. Youse guys really need to get your act together.

When you say "we", who are you referring to?

[Gooch]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1236044190...ss_opinion_main The WSJ called the administration out on the issue (and others) today in a scathing op-ed.

The powers in Congress -- unrebuked by Mr. Obama -- are ridiculing and punishing the very capitalists who are essential to a sustainable recovery. The result has been a capital strike, and the return of the fear from last year that we could face a far deeper downturn. This is no way to nurture a wounded economy back to health.

Listening to Mr. Obama and his chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, on the weekend, we couldn't help but wonder if they appreciate any of this. They seem preoccupied with going to the barricades against Republicans who wield little power, or picking a fight with Rush Limbaugh, as if this is the kind of economic leadership Americans want.

The whole thing's silly. If the Obama administration doesn't think he's right they just simply shouldn't acknowledge him and go about their business. It's a total red herring the administration is using to distract from a substantive debate about it's policies ...

[west20th]

When you say "we", who are you referring to?

Everyone. I take some delight in the Republicans cratering, however it is not good for the country to have one party with all of the power all of the time. Not sure how they can do it but they really need to make some sort of comeback.

edit: if you are refering to the "we" in "we want Rush to keep on talking" maybe that should have read "I".

[Marksmu]

Additionally, anyone hoping that the US doesn't recover until THEIR party goes in is about as unamerican as you can get.

See - there it is! You fell for the trap built by the Liberal media. Rush did not say he wanted the US to stay in a recession till the republicans came in to fix it. He said he hopes Obama's socialist agenda fails. There was never a I hope the economy fails, etc. When you watch the news, or listen to the idiots on the main stream channels, they play the snippet that sounds bad, and then leave the explanation off. Its completely disingenuous; though I have come to expect it from the liberals now.

Rush said that he hopes the SOCIALIST agenda fails. That America rejects it...but you parrot the mainstream media, and you sound unintelligent, regardless of whether you are or not.

I am with Rush on that statement...I PRAY the socialist agenda fails. I do not want my taxes going from 35% to 40%, I dont want to pay your mortgage, your healthcare...I want to expand on my life, and work for myself, and do the things I enjoy b/c I have worked for it...if that means you eat bread and water, and mow a yard on your hands and knees with your mouth, so be it. I dont care. If your so stupid you cant get a good job and your not willing to work, Im not willing to help you. PERIOD. Socialist agendas are BEST LEFT TO CHARITY. Churches/mosques/charities/whatever else exist should do our SOCIAL agenda NOT the government. The government should ONLY provide Military security, Infrastructure, and a VERY limited Few other tasks.

I dont care about people who are leeches....It sounds harsh, but its true. I dont care.

[Highway6]

Additionally, anyone hoping that the US doesn't recover until THEIR party goes in is about as unamerican as you can get.

Thank you for proving my point, Ricco, that those on the left are hypocritical.

Rush never said he hopes the US doesn't recover. He said he hopes Obama fails.. not the US..

Obama....

Not the US...

There is a difference.

Rush, and anyone that disagrees the Stimulus plan and disagrees with spending out the wazzoo on everything under the sun is a better solution then fixing the root of the problem, the financial/banking/housing aspect, wants the US to succeed and they believe what Obama has done so far is not the way to succeed.

If Rush has said he hopes the US doesn't recover.. then you could question his patriotism. Wishing failure of a president's failing strategy that you also believe will be detrimental to our country's future so that a winning strategy may take its place is hardly unpatriotic though.

See - there it is!

You beat me to it.

[ricco67]

Mark and Hwy6;

Ok, If im not that smart, then would you mind explaining something;

If Obama fails, what will happen exactly to the country?

Step back from his "socialist" agenda name calling.

Maybe you guys need a different Metaphor.

If a house is on fire, what difference does it matter what type of water is used to extinguish it? do we have to wait until someone trucks in "®" branded water before we put it out?

Sorry, I don't want to simply wait for the bloody thing to burn unchecked for Four years, let's have a go of it right now and if it doesn't work, the NEXT adminstration can work on it with THEIR plans.

If you start calling "D" water gasoline, you're more pig headed and unimaginative than I would have thought.

Remember, I voted for McCain AND a moderate conservative,so you can't simply throw me in with the rest of the libs. I am not blinded by party affiliation.

[Highway6]

Maybe you guys need a different Metaphor.

If a house is on fire, what difference does it matter what type of water is used to extinguish it? do we have to wait until someone trucks in "

[Jax]

So providing funding for projects which will give people jobs so they can take their money and buy consumer products is not stimulus? I don't get your analogy of shooting water on the wrong house.

There are two ways of helping businesses:

One way is to simply cut their taxes so they can make more money and hope that they start hiring more employees rather than just paying their current employees more.

The other way is to get money out there into the hands of workers by creating projects that require jobs. These people who are now no longer out of work will buy things from companies that make consumer products and therefore improve the profits of those companies so they don't have to lay more people off.

McCain's idea was the former, and Obama's is the latter.

Both have a chance at succeeding, but many economists agree that stimulating the economy from the bottom up is the better way to go (Obama's plan). The problem with the Republican plan is that first of all we've been doing that for 8 years and it doesn't seem to have worked well. Cutting taxes more than Bush already has will mean the government will have to cut back on services (less unemployment insurance, less health care, less science research, less new roads and highways and rail and stuff like that). There is also no guarantee that if you cut taxes companies will hire more employees. They might just take the money and give it out to the management in the form of bonuses or something like that.

At least under Obama's plan the country will be left with lasting infrastructure, something tangible and beneficial to the country.

Also I like the idea of giving low income people jobs. If a person don't have much money and doesn't have a job and doesn't have any hope of finding one, chances are high that they will turn to crime. I'd rather see all of the unemployed construction workers building high speed rail and fixing roads than hoping that corporate tax cuts will get them a new job.

I'm not convinced that a huge corporate tax cut like McCain proposed would trickle down and help low income people as much as most Republicans seem to think it will.

To me, the election was sort of a referendum on trickle down economics. Most people wanted to try something different than trickle down economics this time. And that's exactly what Obama is doing.

I'd like to see Republicans come up with some idea of stimulating the economy without cutting taxes, but I understand that the whole point of conservatism is to resist change, so that most likely won't happen.

[barracuda]

...I want to expand on my life, and work for myself, and do the things I enjoy b/c I have worked for it...if that means you eat bread and water, and mow a yard on your hands and knees with your mouth, so be it. I dont care. If your so stupid you cant get a good job and your not willing to work, Im not willing to help you. PERIOD. Socialist agendas are BEST LEFT TO CHARITY. Churches/mosques/charities/whatever else exist should do our SOCIAL agenda NOT the government. The government should ONLY provide Military security, Infrastructure, and a VERY limited Few other tasks.

I dont care about people who are leeches....It sounds harsh, but its true. I dont care.

So it's American to look the other way when people who had no part in creating the current mess are losing jobs and being kicked out of their homes because of it. And we should opt to let the economy continue to crater rather than take massive, and many economists seem to believe necessary, steps to reverse it.

Oh, and any human being who needs help is equivalent to a leech. Got it.

[sarahiki]

So it's American to look the other way when people who had no part in creating the current mess are losing jobs and being kicked out of their homes because of it. And we should opt to let the economy continue to crater rather than take massive, and many economists seem to believe necessary, steps to reverse it.

Oh, and any human being who needs help is equivalent to a leech. Got it.

I might add to what you said by noting that people often fail to recognize the advantages they've been given, and attribute all their luck and success to their own hard work. Sure, hard work is a critical part of the equation, of course. But never mind if you happened to be born white, male, and in a home where you were given good care and a good education? People not born or raised with those advantages have it harder, period. That's not to say that they shouldn't work hard to overcome them (some do, some don't), but it's BS to claim that everyone who has it tough right now DESERVES it. And it's just nauseating to hear that attitude coming from people with the advantages listed above.

[sevfiv]

If your [sic] so stupid you cant get a good job and your not willing to work, Im not willing to help you. PERIOD.

Stupid people get good jobs, and smart people don't sometimes. Gross generalizations don't help. Also, by your tinfoil description of our society, we do live in a socialist nation - until you get your secluded piece of land, protect it and yourself, make all of the roads and improvements, find somewhere to put your waste, and educate yourself/family, getting more comfortable with it might save you a trip to the cardiologist.

[Marksmu]

Mark and Hwy6;

Ok, If im not that smart, then would you mind explaining something;

If Obama fails, what will happen exactly to the country?

Step back from his "socialist" agenda name calling.

Maybe you guys need a different Metaphor.

If a house is on fire, what difference does it matter what type of water is used to extinguish it? do we have to wait until someone trucks in "

[Gooch]

I'd like to see Republicans come up with some idea of stimulating the economy without cutting taxes...

Cutting taxes is HOW you stimulate the economy. I do not get to spend over 63 cents of every dollar I earn. It's taxed away. I'd spend more if I had it. But I don't. So only $0.37 of every dollar I earn stimulates the economy. How is that effective? How is taking more of my money through higher taxes going to effectively stimulate the economy? Educate me, because I don't understand. What's the difference if government spends that 63 cents? If the people get to spend their own money; it is (or can be) empowering to them. If the government spends it; it is empowering to the government. Empowering people through self-determination is what Conservatitism is.

The sad part is the administration indirectly admits higher taxes cause money to flee the market! Part of the Obama omnibus spending bill is to go after and prevent US companies from relocating overseas. Why are they fleeing the US to go overseas? To avoid taxes! Erecting walls to keep money within the US so it can be soaked off by the govenment will work as well as the Iron Curtain did for keeping people not seeking freedom in Eastern Europe.

... but I understand that the whole point of conservatism is to resist change, so that most likely won't happen.

Total misconception. It is NOT resistance to change. Conservatives want serious change. Just not the change that this administration wants.

I'd like to see Democrats come up with a solution that doesn't involve higher taxes or pork-barrel spending.

[Highway6]

So providing funding for projects which will give people jobs so they can take their money and buy consumer products is not stimulus? I don't get your analogy of shooting water on the wrong house.

Not the wrong house.. the entire neighborhood.

One big broad hose that covers everything without targeting where the fire started.

Getting the financial system straitened out, getting rid of the greedy ones that screwed it up, getting confidence back on the Street, pumping money where it matters. into institutions that lend money.. most important, just getting confidence back to the people. That is a more targeted solution.

The Stimulus Spending Package wont create enough jobs or create jobs soon enough to matter.

My confidence in our financial system is not restored nor are jobs created because Obama's broad shooting hose wants to spend millions on condoms or wildlife studies or into making our healthcare system paperless.

[Mark F. Barnes]

If anyone doesn't think the current administration isn't jumping for joy that Limbaugh is trying to throw his hat in the ring, is really out of tough. Limbaugh will do nothing but split the party into two parts. People that have a clue that he's a grandstanding, media whore, that is looking out for no one except himself, and those who are sheepish enough to think he has any answers. The Democrats are jumping for joy as long as he has a camera in his face. The current administration has no chance what so ever of fixing this economy in four years, and know with out help, they are out of a job again. People are already seeing that change was not what they thought it was. Obama's rock-star number have been slipping since the day he took the oath. http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-D...b-Approval.aspx Another four years in this direction and they will be packing up the Whitehouse for the next President. And anyone that will realistically look at the shape we are in, no matter what is done by whatever side, there is no quick fix to this, and to think it will turn around in a year or two, is a pipe dream. Sure we need government spending reform, and we are going to also have to renovate the entire system to get that. Do you think it is going to happen? Hell no. You have not got enough honest members in either party to bring about that much change. And does it look like any reform going on at this point in time? Nope, same old story, pork, pork, and more pork, from both sides. A four trillion dollar budget for next year, that's not going to fix it. Rush Limbaugh can scream and holler till he drops dean from a stroke, and nothing is going to change. The people who make the rules are the ones screwing the people. Do you actually think that all of a sudden, all these crooks in DC are going to have some great revelation overcome them, and all of a sudden they start doing what is right? You really have go to be kidding if you think it for one minute. They would put themselves out of work, if they actually did the right thing.

People need to take some self responsibility, quit putting yourself in debt to your eyeballs. If you can't afford it, you do not need it, period. Quit crying that someone made you do it, or that you had no choice. You have plenty of choices, quit spending all your money. If your bills are too high, quit buying things on credit. If you can't pay your electric bill turn off the lights and A/C. Lived plenty of years without them before. Can't afford groceries, grow a garden, folks did it for years. Learn to do without, it's simple, just do it. Quit spending money that is not absolutely necessary, cut up your credit cards. Get yourself a check card and spend it only if you have it to spend.

[Jax]

The Stimulus Spending Package wont create enough jobs or create jobs soon enough to matter.

That is not a fact, it's your opinion and the opinion of one group of politicians.

[Marksmu]

So providing funding for projects which will give people jobs so they can take their money and buy consumer products is not stimulus? I don't get your analogy of shooting water on the wrong house.

There are two ways of helping businesses:

One way is to simply cut their taxes so they can make more money and hope that they start hiring more employees rather than just paying their current employees more.

The other way is to get money out there into the hands of workers by creating projects that require jobs. These people who are now no longer out of work will buy things from companies that make consumer products and therefore improve the profits of those companies so they don't have to lay more people off.

McCain's idea was the former, and Obama's is the latter.

Both have a chance at succeeding, but many economists agree that stimulating the economy from the bottom up is the better way to go (Obama's plan). The problem with the Republican plan is that first of all we've been doing that for 8 years and it doesn't seem to have worked well. Cutting taxes more than Bush already has will mean the government will have to cut back on services (less unemployment insurance, less health care, less science research, less new roads and highways and rail and stuff like that). There is also no guarantee that if you cut taxes companies will hire more employees. They might just take the money and give it out to the management in the form of bonuses or something like that.

That is called trickle up Poverty - the people who used to do the work stop working as they lose incentives to work. There is a breaking point where I will work less b/c the advantages of more work for less money no longer are appealing. My time is better spent fishing, than making 30 cents on the dollar I am paid.

And I am so sick and tired of people playing the ghetto card. White males are becoming the MOST discriminated against people in America - but that is completely off the economic topic this thread is on.

To me it is crazy to assume the less educated people will spend the money better and more efficiently the more educated people - which is why its called trickle UP poverty. If they dont have those "advantages" they wont know what to do with it.

Its become a full on war from the left....make promises for free things to those people who have little or nothing in exchange for their vote, then destroy the free market private industry by fulfilling your promises with higher taxes on those who support the WHOLE country. You cement your place in office as its easy to give but not so easy to earn. Its coming - and its going to be everyone who voted for Obama's fault.

Sad part is - more people (at least those voting for Obama) will probably be happy doing nothing and having little, than they would if they had the opportunity to actually work, and earn and have lots.

[sarahiki]

White males are becoming the MOST discriminated against people in America

:lol:

[J W]

See - there it is! You fell for the trap built by the Liberal media. Rush did not say he wanted the US to stay in a recession till the republicans came in to fix it. He said he hopes Obama's socialist agenda fails. There was never a I hope the economy fails, etc. When you watch the news, or listen to the idiots on the main stream channels, they play the snippet that sounds bad, and then leave the explanation off. Its completely disingenuous; though I have come to expect it from the liberals now.

Rush said that he hopes the SOCIALIST agenda fails. That America rejects it...but you parrot the mainstream media, and you sound unintelligent, regardless of whether you are or not.

I am with Rush on that statement...I PRAY the socialist agenda fails. I do not want my taxes going from 35% to 40%, I dont want to pay your mortgage, your healthcare...I want to expand on my life, and work for myself, and do the things I enjoy b/c I have worked for it...if that means you eat bread and water, and mow a yard on your hands and knees with your mouth, so be it. I dont care. If your so stupid you cant get a good job and your not willing to work, Im not willing to help you. PERIOD. Socialist agendas are BEST LEFT TO CHARITY. Churches/mosques/charities/whatever else exist should do our SOCIAL agenda NOT the government. The government should ONLY provide Military security, Infrastructure, and a VERY limited Few other tasks.

I dont care about people who are leeches....It sounds harsh, but its true. I dont care.

Dog eat dog ! Survival of the fittess ! Greed is good ! Real mainstream stuff there buddy.

[flipper]

People need to take some self responsibility, quit putting yourself in debt to your eyeballs. If you can't afford it, you do not need it, period. Quit crying that someone made you do it, or that you had no choice. You have plenty of choices, quit spending all your money. If your bills are too high, quit buying things on credit. If you can't pay your electric bill turn off the lights and A/C. Lived plenty of years without them before. Can't afford groceries, grow a garden, folks did it for years. Learn to do without, it's simple, just do it. Quit spending money that is not absolutely necessary, cut up your credit cards. Get yourself a check card and spend it only if you have it to spend.

SING IT SISTA!

How quickly Americans have come to rely on and deserve the ability to go into debt. What a great example the government sets for us as well.

flipper

[TJones]

as a liberal I resent that--I still have a job! Even though Hater TJ wishes I didn't!

My wish for you is that you didn't have to be under constant worry that you won't have a job tomorrow. My wish for you is that you worked for a better company.

[liammclaren]

I also think it's interesting that in Canada, even the right-wing conservative party supports government run essential services like healthcare (yes healthcare is considered essential even by conservatives). Nobody calls them socialists or communists for doing that. They just consider it a fundamental right that any political system should provide - whether the party is left or right leaning.

The question is not whether something like government run healthcare is "essential", the question is whether it's constitutional, which it is certainly not. Of course, half of what the federal government does is unconstitutional, and both "liberals" and "conservatives" (a false paradigm if there ever was one) are part of it.

[ricco67]

If anyone doesn't think the current administration isn't jumping for joy that Limbaugh is trying to throw his hat in the ring, is really out of tough. Limbaugh will do nothing but split the party into two parts. People that have a clue that he's a grandstanding, media whore, that is looking out for no one except himself, and those who are sheepish enough to think he has any answers. The Democrats are jumping for joy as long as he has a camera in his face. The current administration has no chance what so ever of fixing this economy in four years, and know with out help, they are out of a job again. People are already seeing that change was not what they thought it was. Obama's rock-star number have been slipping since the day he took the oath. http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-D...b-Approval.aspx Another four years in this direction and they will be packing up the Whitehouse for the next President. And anyone that will realistically look at the shape we are in, no matter what is done by whatever side, there is no quick fix to this, and to think it will turn around in a year or two, is a pipe dream. Sure we need government spending reform, and we are going to also have to renovate the entire system to get that. Do you think it is going to happen? Hell no. You have not got enough honest members in either party to bring about that much change. And does it look like any reform going on at this point in time? Nope, same old story, pork, pork, and more pork, from both sides. A four trillion dollar budget for next year, that's not going to fix it. Rush Limbaugh can scream and holler till he drops dean from a stroke, and nothing is going to change. The people who make the rules are the ones screwing the people. Do you actually think that all of a sudden, all these crooks in DC are going to have some great revelation overcome them, and all of a sudden they start doing what is right? You really have go to be kidding if you think it for one minute. They would put themselves out of work, if they actually did the right thing.

People need to take some self responsibility, quit putting yourself in debt to your eyeballs. If you can't afford it, you do not need it, period. Quit crying that someone made you do it, or that you had no choice. You have plenty of choices, quit spending all your money. If your bills are too high, quit buying things on credit. If you can't pay your electric bill turn off the lights and A/C. Lived plenty of years without them before. Can't afford groceries, grow a garden, folks did it for years. Learn to do without, it's simple, just do it. Quit spending money that is not absolutely necessary, cut up your credit cards. Get yourself a check card and spend it only if you have it to spend.

I totally agree!

The package that was passed is no different than what was passed since the term "pork spending" was created.

Is it perfect? Hardly. But i am hoping that there is enough in there to do some good.

Let us not forget that whike the GOP didn't vote for this package, they were ALL rather quick to brag about the spending they brought back to their home states.

[Highway6]

That is not a fact, it's your opinion and the opinion of one group of politicians.

Spending money on infrastructure construction projects is great in terms of the infrastructure built. But all the money goes to projects that were already on the table.... like our rail. Our rail was going to be built regardless. It's not like Obama says, lets build more freeways and all of a sudden, there is money to pay the previous unemployed to build a completely new road that hasnt been previously thought up as needed and engineered. New roads arent going to be built, nor should they be built, soley for the purpose of giving people a road to build.

I'm in the construction industry. My job as well as many others won't be spared because the gvt infrastructure projects planned are allowed to move forward. IT will be spared when the financial system is fixed, and confidence is restored to lenders and developers and the private construction sector can move forward.

There are limitations to relying in gvt infrastructure projects to save our jobs. Infrastructure projects are massive and complicated. Look at our rail system again. It's taken us how many years to get where we are ?

Even if new projects are thought up tomorrow with the promise of incoming money, how many years do you think it's going to be before those projects are actually constructed.

Another limitation is shortage of skilled labor. The guy that sheetrocks new homes or pours sidewalks isnt skilled enough to build bridges, dams, highways, rail lines etc. So, even if all the infrastructure projects waiting to be built get the financial go ahead tomorrow, there wont be enough skilled workers to do the job and it will take significant time for workers to acquire those skills.

On the other hand.. get the private sector enough confidence and access to capital to start building malls, homes, office buildings, churches, etc again... there's your job creation.

The Infrastructure created by the New Deal was great. But as far as federal jobs creation program created by building that infrastructure, it wasn't a success. The Great Depression still lasted a decade. It was mobilizing for WWII ( while technically i guess this too counts as federal job creation) that ended the Depression.... not building bunch of highways.

1929, year of the stock market crash.. unemployment was 3%

1939, despite the New Deal job creation through infrastructure, unemployment was 17%

Unemployment rates didnt get to below 10% until 1941, the year we entered WWII

http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1528.html

[Jax]

The question is not whether something like government run healthcare is "essential", the question is whether it's constitutional, which it is certainly not. Of course, half of what the federal government does is unconstitutional, and both "liberals" and "conservatives" (a false paradigm if there ever was one) are part of it.

That might be your opinion but I don't recall the constitution explicitly forbidding a government run health insurance plan.

[Jax]

Unemployment rates didnt get to below 10% until 1941, the year we entered WWII

Just because the unemployment rate stared to drop the year we entered WWII doesn't mean that WWII was solely responsible for that drop. I know WWII was a big part of what got us out of the great depression but I don't think the war was the only reason unemployment dropped. Anybody have any more detailed stats? Maybe month by month approaching the war?

[crunchtastic]

Enough with the constant overstatement of middle-class specialness. Perhaps we could get past all the rancor by putting things in historical context, or by adopting a broader worldview. There are very few middle class, college educated, young white Americans, making good salaries as corporate cubicle jockeys, who can legitimately claim hard work. The truth is, they got the luck of the draw being born to white middle class parents at the end of the 20th century in America, and have spent their entire lives (as have many of their parents) enjoying the fruits of an economic bubble without much toil. They have acquired much, but earned little, and risked even less. They put on a nice shirt and some wrinkle resistant pants and 'solve problems' or mess about in various software programs for 5 or 6 hours a day. They've been been doing this not terribly hard work for 5 or 6 or 7 years since getting an unremarkable college degree. They are now angry and fearful, because they are vastly outnumbered by non-white people who work in a less important capacity and make far less money, yet multiply much more rapidly and consume more resources.

It sucks to come face-to-face with the notion that the lifestyle one inherited was never fully sustainable, but one doesn't have to act like a petulant, hateful douche about it. American middle class life may be very different in the 21st century. We shall have to adjust.

[Jax]

Here are some unemployment figures.

Number unemployed in America:

1929 - 2.6 million

1933 - 15 million

1935 - 11 million

1937 - 8.3 million

1938 - 10.5 million

1939 - 9.2 million

It would also be interesting to look at the GDP during that time.

It looks like the unemployment numbers were improving before 1941. What would have happened if the government sat back and did nothing rather than creating new infrastructure projects? Would unemployment have sat at 15 million until 1941? I know that the war had a huge impact on the economy, but I don't think it was the only factor.

Anybody want to start talking about Hoover's response to the depression and whether it was a success?