individualism for the masses

BK Marcus is an amateur political economist with no formal education in the subject.

He works from Charlottesville, Virginia as an editorial consultant for the Ludwig von Mises Institute and managing editor of Mises.org.

He is no longer a house husband, nor a faculty spouse, but he is still a dilettante and a layabout, at least in spirit.

twitter.com/bkmarcus

recent

Please supportGo To Project Gutenberg

Wikipedia Affiliate Button

"It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a 'dismal science.' But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance."

Murray Rothbard

calendar

February 2008
S M T W T F S
« Jan   Mar »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
242526272829  

archives

categories


Benjamin Tucker Marcus
February 19, 2010

the myth of FDR

February 29th, 2008 by bkmarcus

It’s John T. Flynn weekend at Mises.org, starting with an abridged version of Justin Raimondo’s “John T. Flynn: Exemplar of the Old Right”Download PDF from the Journal of Libertarian Studies and followed by Ralph Raico’s great introduction to Flynn’s groundbreaking The Roosevelt Myth.Download PDF

This is especially timely with the deadly Keynesian religion on the rise. High priest Paul Krugman recently resurrected this coprocephalic canard:

The fact is that war is, in general, expansionary for the economy, at least in the short run. World War II, remember, ended the Great Depression. The $10 billion or so we’re spending each month in Iraq mainly goes to US-produced goods and services, which means that the war is actually supporting demand. Yes, there would be infinitely better ways to spend the money. But at a time when a shortfall of demand is the problem, the Iraq war nonetheless acts as a sort of WPA, supporting employment directly and indirectly.

Bastiat, anyone?

Update: How man of us had a history class that would have helped us understand this political cartoon from the 1930s?

Maybe your schooling was a lot better than mine. I remember being taught that Hoover was a do-nothing and that FDR offered the hope of a more activist government. Raimondo writes:

When Roosevelt was swept into office, Flynn welcomed him, sharing the hope that the new president would get the country moving again. Flynn supported the Democratic Party platform of 1932, which called for an end to the extravagant spending of the Republicans, a balanced budget, and the abolition of the many government bureaus and commissions.

But Flynn was soon disillusioned. In fact, the New Deal that Roosevelt sold to the American people in 1932 bore absolutely no resemblance to the one he immediately imposed on an unsuspecting nation. During the first 100 days of his administration, Roosevelt racked up a deficit larger than the one it took Hoover two years to produce. Worse, from Flynn’s viewpoint, was the blizzard of new government agencies the president created — agencies that sought to regulate every aspect of economic life — and the billions in borrowed money that financed them.

Posted in LvMI, war | No Comments »

Leave a Comment

Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.