It's not my day off...

Okay, so if we can over-look the unemployment numbers, can we all agree that the "Depression of 1929" (aka the Great Depression) was OVER by 1937? OVER meaning that all economic indicators were HIGHER than they had been in 1929 prior to the Crash, with the agreed-upon exception of unemployment.

IF we can agree on this (and I am not holding my breath), and we also agree with the obvious and irrefutable fact that NO economic indicator was on the RISE prior to the election of FDR to the Presidency, then how can you continue to assert that the ENTIRE New Deal effort was a failure? SOMETHING had to have worked, and many of those SOMETHINGs are supported by GOP and conservative economists, as I have shown in MY previous posts.

I have never pointed to any ONE (or even multiple) program within the New Deal as the "ONE that saved us all!" I have pointed to MANY programs that I feel FAILED to achieve their stated goals or the goals of the Administration that implemented them. My argument has always been that it was the ENTIRE effort of deficit spending across the board that prompted the recovery... in exactly the same way that Reagan's "deficit spending" in the 80s prompted THAT recovery... and that the initial deficit budgets of the Clinton years prompted the BOOM that we all remember so fondly of only 10 to 12 years ago.

Furthermore, I have CONTINUALLY argued that the difference between then and now is that FDR had to continually contend with a CONSERVATIVE Congress that demanded the deficit be curbed, every step of the way... but Obama DOESN'T have that anchor around his neck. No comparison can be made between FDR's policies and Obama's without understanding that difference.

Response?