Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 11/3/2009 8:23:05 AM EST
If the "Great Depression" happened today how would it be different than in the 1920's?

We have less manufacturing capacity (adjusted for population) than we did in the 20's.

We are less competetive in manufacturing costs because China/India can do it cheaper.

We have more % of our general population already on .gov subsidies.

We have too many environmental regulations that prevent business growth.



If this recession sprials into another 'Great Depression" we are in a world of trouble that I'm not sure we are capable of digging ourselves out of without significant changes that I fear the average person won't support until it's too late.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 8:26:23 AM EST
The system of systems wouldn't survive. Total collapse.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 8:27:56 AM EST
Cities are even more congested. Urban areas would burn.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 8:29:56 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/3/2009 8:30:43 AM EST by savage_winchester]
tag

Half of the country would sit on their ass with their hand out.

Wait...
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 8:30:11 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/3/2009 8:31:22 AM EST by Bodacious2182]
Originally Posted By strat81:
Cities are even more congested. Urban areas would burn.


agree

As the jobless rate climbs and welfare money runs out and people start to get hungry, they will get desperate and start committing more and more crimes to just eat.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 8:32:00 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/3/2009 8:35:12 AM EST by edman99]
Today there are millions of entitlement-minded people. This wasn't the case back then.
If the gubmint didn't give them what they want/deserve there would be total civil
collapse.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 8:33:19 AM EST
Originally Posted By edman99:
Today there are millions of entitlement-minded people. This wasn't the case back then.
If the gubmint didn't give them what they want/deserve there would be total civil
collaspe.


This is why I buy more ammo.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 8:33:28 AM EST
The Feds would keep handing out money rather than let unemployment or welfare benefits end. It may become more worthless money, but it will keep coming.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 8:33:52 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/3/2009 8:34:56 AM EST by douglasmorris99]
the biggest issue is in 1920 a Large majorty of the country, I have always said 70% were still of the farm mindset, even in NY city there were chicken coops,pigeon coops, vegetable gardens etc all over the place,
places not effected by the DUST BOWL, life pretty much went on, it was the City Folks mostly effected, those that left the farms after WWI to work in the factories and sweatshops..

even in the industrial North, my great aunts and uncles that were in the USA were not heavily effected, there wasnt a lot of cash to be had, but, they all said they didnt have much cash before the crash..

living in the South for over 30 years I have heard 100's of stories from La, Miss, rural Texas, and Ark..all telling similar stores, MANY not even knowing life was any different from before the "crash"


drive by a mulit unit apt complex, one of those big 500-1000 unit ones,,

imagine 99% of them dont understand that McNuggets came from a chicken or how to get them IF they did...

a massive depression comparable to the 1920's will be the death of america,,,and seeminly exactly where the Dems want to take us..
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 8:34:51 AM EST
Originally Posted By edman99:
Today there are millions of entitlement-minded people. This wasn't the case back then.
If the gubmint didn't give them what they want/deserve there would be total civil
collaspe.


I imagine the .gov is spending exponentially more in welfare etc, today, than during the Great Depression.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 8:37:50 AM EST

Originally Posted By edman99:
Today there are millions of entitlement-minded people. This wasn't the case back then.
If the gubmint didn't give them what they want/deserve there would be total civil
collaspe.

So it would be like living on Post Katrina New Orleans or just everyday D.C.....

Another big problem is out standard of living is based off disposable goods. Shoes no longer get re-soled. Jeans don't get mended. Almost everything in our society is meant to be thrown away.

Both because you make more money per unit and because scumbags with no honor abuse return policies to shift the burden to the rest of us. Semi-disposable goods mediated that.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 8:38:45 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/3/2009 8:44:03 AM EST by VelociMorte]
Back then, most people were looking for employment. Today, most people will be looking for an "entitlement". When they don't get it, they'll take whatever it is they feel entitled to. Cities will burn. Picture the Rodney King riots and post-Katrina New Orleans in every major city.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 8:40:30 AM EST
Originally Posted By JonnyVain:
Originally Posted By edman99:
Today there are millions of entitlement-minded people. This wasn't the case back then.
If the gubmint didn't give them what they want/deserve there would be total civil
collaspe.


This is why I buy more ammo.


I LOL'd at this response.








Now I've got my debit card out and going to the AIMSURPLUS website to buy more 5.56
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 8:42:01 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/3/2009 8:43:42 AM EST by Bhart89]
Originally Posted By Lovelessk999:

Originally Posted By edman99:
Today there are millions of entitlement-minded people. This wasn't the case back then.
If the gubmint didn't give them what they want/deserve there would be total civil
collaspe.

So it would be like living on Post Katrina New Orleans or just everyday D.C.....

Another big problem is out standard of living is based off disposable goods. Shoes no longer get re-soled. Jeans don't get mended. Almost everything in our society is meant to be thrown away.

Both because you make more money per unit and because scumbags with no honor abuse return policies to shift the burden to the rest of us. Semi-disposable goods mediated that.


I agree 100% Today's average person doesn't even know how to resole a shoe or mend a torn article of clothing. They are conditioned to just buy a new pair.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 8:44:14 AM EST

Originally Posted By strat81:
Cities are even more congested. Urban areas would burn.

This

Especially in cities with a high welfare/public housing population.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 8:45:40 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/3/2009 8:46:39 AM EST by SIPCAT-C]
1 (check that I guess it was 7) million starved to death last time.
Multiply that by 10 (at least)
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 8:54:40 AM EST
Think of Germany in the late 20's. Worthless money, riots, people willing to do anything - even change their laws so that a charismatic politician can become a leader for life, because he espouses Hope and Change.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 8:56:14 AM EST
People were a whole lot more self sufficient back then. The majority of people had gardens even small livestock like chickens. The whole supply of food in general was much more local.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 9:01:26 AM EST
Originally Posted By VelociMorte:
Back then, most people were looking for employment. Today, most people will be looking for an "entitlement". When they don't get it, they'll take whatever it is they feel entitled to. Cities will burn. Picture the Rodney King riots and post-Katrina New Orleans in every major city.


Well said
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 9:02:28 AM EST
The knowledge on how to grow porch/patio food, and have a small garden, or even how to have a second or third job does not apply today. The masses would swamp the food kitchens and soup lines and the numbers moving from one glimmer of hope to the next would make the migrations of the Okies look pale in comparison....but the movement would imply a desire to find work, something most would not want or have.

It simply would be very bad.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 9:04:01 AM EST

Originally Posted By douglasmorris99:

McNuggets came from a chicken



sure
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 9:09:39 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/3/2009 9:10:28 AM EST by Hebrew_Battle_Rifle]
We didn't have a depression in the 1920's. The 1920's were boom years. That is why they were called The Roaring 20's. The depression occurred in the 1930's. There is a line in the song Song of the South that reads "somebody told us the Wall Street fell. We were so poor that we couldn't even tell." All of the relatives that I had that lived through that era said pretty much the same thing. The Great Depression had no effect on them. They were rural farm folk and with a few exceptions, what they needed to exist was produced at home.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 9:11:09 AM EST
Back then, people knew how to do things for themselves. Today... no.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 9:15:02 AM EST
The complete breakdown of the family unit in urban areas will lead to a level of violence few are willing to admit.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 9:16:44 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/3/2009 9:17:25 AM EST by WildApple]
-Instead of soup lines, we would hand out food stamps.
-home invasions &violence on the elderly
-?
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 9:19:26 AM EST
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 9:22:21 AM EST

Originally Posted By Ker-Pow:
Think of Germany in the late 20's. Worthless money, riots, people willing to do anything - even change their laws so that a charismatic politician can become a leader for life, because he espouses Hope and Change.


I think Obama's window of opportunity has slammed shut for that.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 9:29:51 AM EST
I don't think things would get as bad now as they did then.

We had too high a percentage of people in farming and manufacturing jobs.

Diversification helps us to avoid major catastrophes.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 9:32:26 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/3/2009 9:34:50 AM EST by Rabon]
I think a lot of folks who think they are tough, will find they are somewhat helpless. The average American is just a few weeks of unemployment away from being homeless. Many parts of the country which have never had this issue are beginning to experience it now.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 9:36:31 AM EST
IBDA
(in before Dave_A)
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 9:41:15 AM EST

Originally Posted By Hebrew_Battle_Rifle:
We didn't have a depression in the 1920's. The 1920's were boom years. That is why they were called The Roaring 20's. The depression occurred in the 1930's.

What he said.


Link Posted: 11/3/2009 9:49:50 AM EST

Originally Posted By GI-45:
Originally Posted By Hebrew_Battle_Rifle:
We didn't have a depression in the 1920's. The 1920's were boom years. That is why they were called The Roaring 20's. The depression occurred in the 1930's.
What he said.

The depression started in 1929, but yes most of it was in the 30s.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 9:54:43 AM EST
There would be more people today "blading at 45" and asking if it's "go time".


Besides that, a lot more starvation and civil unrest.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 9:54:56 AM EST

Originally Posted By max229:

Originally Posted By GI-45:
Originally Posted By Hebrew_Battle_Rifle:
We didn't have a depression in the 1920's. The 1920's were boom years. That is why they were called The Roaring 20's. The depression occurred in the 1930's.
What he said.

The depression started in 1929, but yes most of it was in the 30s.

The stock market crash occurred in October of 1929; the full effects of the Depression were not felt until the early 1930s.


Link Posted: 11/3/2009 9:57:02 AM EST

Originally Posted By Bhart89:
If the "Great Depression" happened today how would it be different than in the 1920's?

We have less manufacturing capacity (adjusted for population) than we did in the 20's.

We are less competetive in manufacturing costs because China/India can do it cheaper.

We have more % of our general population already on .gov subsidies.

We have too many environmental regulations that prevent business growth.



If this recession sprials into another 'Great Depression" we are in a world of trouble that I'm not sure we are capable of digging ourselves out of without significant changes that I fear the average person won't support until it's too late.

The population won't 'wait it out' any more than they did back then...

Obama will seem conservative compared to who gets to be President in that sort of mess...
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 9:57:21 AM EST

Originally Posted By GI-45:
Originally Posted By max229:
Originally Posted By GI-45:
Originally Posted By Hebrew_Battle_Rifle:
We didn't have a depression in the 1920's. The 1920's were boom years. That is why they were called The Roaring 20's. The depression occurred in the 1930's.
What he said.
The depression started in 1929, but yes most of it was in the 30s.
The stock market crash occurred in October of 1929; the full effects of the Depression were not felt until the early 1930s.

That's true. Things did keep getting worse for several years after the [October 1929?] crash.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 10:03:58 AM EST

Originally Posted By max229:

Originally Posted By GI-45:
Originally Posted By max229:
Originally Posted By GI-45:
Originally Posted By Hebrew_Battle_Rifle:
We didn't have a depression in the 1920's. The 1920's were boom years. That is why they were called The Roaring 20's. The depression occurred in the 1930's.
What he said.
The depression started in 1929, but yes most of it was in the 30s.
The stock market crash occurred in October of 1929; the full effects of the Depression were not felt until the early 1930s.

That's true. Things did keep getting worse for several years after the [October 1929?] crash.

Basically, I don't believe that anyone during October thru December 1929 was saying, "We're in a Depression." That came later. And that's why the Depression is considered to be an event of the 1930s, not 20s.

Some people are spelling nazis, others grammar nazis; I'm a date nazi.


Link Posted: 11/3/2009 10:04:11 AM EST

We have less manufacturing capacity (adjusted for population) than we did in the 20's.


What is your source for this claim?
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 10:14:14 AM EST
Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By Bhart89:
If the "Great Depression" happened today how would it be different than in the 1920's?

We have less manufacturing capacity (adjusted for population) than we did in the 20's.

We are less competetive in manufacturing costs because China/India can do it cheaper.

We have more % of our general population already on .gov subsidies.

We have too many environmental regulations that prevent business growth.



If this recession sprials into another 'Great Depression" we are in a world of trouble that I'm not sure we are capable of digging ourselves out of without significant changes that I fear the average person won't support until it's too late.

The population won't 'wait it out' any more than they did back then...

Obama will seem conservative compared to who gets to be President in that sort of mess...


American People: FIX IT!


Roosevelt 2.0: Gosh, I might have to serve 5 terms, stack the Supreme Court, seize private property, intern hundreds of thousands of people in prison camps, restrict certain firearms, make it illegal to grow your own wheat so that farmers on the other side of the country get 2 cents more an acre, and generally piss all over the constitution and personal freedom...


American People: Yeah, sure, whatever, just FIX IT!
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 10:35:37 AM EST
Originally Posted By agillig:

Originally Posted By Ker-Pow:
Think of Germany in the late 20's. Worthless money, riots, people willing to do anything - even change their laws so that a charismatic politician can become a leader for life, because he espouses Hope and Change.


I think Obama's window of opportunity has slammed shut for that.


It doesn't necessarily have to be Obama. The point is, people will give up a lot of real liberties for very little in perceived security in return.
Obama being elected reaffirmed that. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Chavez, Castro, etc., etc. have proven that time and time again.

Link Posted: 11/3/2009 10:39:37 AM EST
An economic downturn the size and scope of the Great Depression would get ugly very quickly. Crime would skyrocket, and violence would be the norm in the cities.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 10:42:22 AM EST
Originally Posted By JonnyVain:
Originally Posted By edman99:
Today there are millions of entitlement-minded people. This wasn't the case back then.
If the gubmint didn't give them what they want/deserve there would be total civil
collaspe.


This is why I buy more ammo.



Ugly but I agree
Note to self pick up some more soon
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 10:42:22 AM EST
Originally Posted By Ker-Pow:
Think of Germany in the late 20's. Worthless money, riots, people willing to do anything - even change their laws so that a charismatic politician can become a leader for life, because he espouses Hope and Change.


You can't insult the Dear Leader like that! You are a candidate for a re-education camp. As soon as that pesky constitution can be completely circumvented out-dated thinking like yours will be dealt with.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 11:08:42 AM EST
People today have a LOT less strength of character and tolerance for hardship.

Link Posted: 11/3/2009 11:12:14 AM EST

Originally Posted By max229:
I don't think things would get as bad now as they did then.

We had too high a percentage of people in farming and manufacturing jobs.

Diversification helps us to avoid major catastrophes.




Link Posted: 11/3/2009 11:19:44 AM EST
Originally Posted By Terminus:

Originally Posted By max229:
I don't think things would get as bad now as they did then.

We had too high a percentage of people in farming and manufacturing jobs.

Diversification helps us to avoid major catastrophes.






Yes, the unemployed McDonald's fry station workers, Starbuck's baristas, welfare program data entry clerks, and JC Penny's cashiers will surely make for a diverse and skillful workforce capable of bootstrapping us out of an economic collapse...
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 11:46:08 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/3/2009 11:56:54 AM EST by jeffers_mz]
I think you'll get the best possible answer to your question by reading up on Argentina 1990s and again in the 2000s, Russia in the 1990s, the far east, Thailand and Malaysia in the 1990s, Iceland currently, and to some extent, Japan thru the 1990s and currently.

Thngs are different now, and the differences can change outcomes a lot. The flow of capital is much more digital now, compared with the 1930s, same with the flow of information. Whatever happens, will happen with stunning rapidity.

There are structures in place now that were not in place during the 1930s, including the IMF, FDIC, SIPC, and others. I'm not saying that the IMF would solve any problems, instead, they would negate some problems and introduce others, which could be even worse.

Other structures that were in place in the 1930s are no longer in existence, namely worldwide gold standards.

Finally, I have been reading up on this exact subject since mid-summer, multiple accounts of recent and not so recent economic crises, multiple accounts as in several different assessments of each single crisis, perhaps 30-40 thick textbooks so far, then going back and re-reading critical texts in order to integrate different details, so as to form a unified perception of the possibilities.

I have come to several conclusions, but the one that will affect the most people is the shock, and utter outrage that many of the governmental actions taken during economic crisis, recently and further back, will engender. Most Americans have absolutely no idea just how far governments and bankers will go to protect their power, but if you study up on real history, you will find that there is no limit to what they will attempt and successfully accomplish.

Some, but by no means all the relevent examples:

1. Russia outlawed banknotes worth more than 1000 rubles in the 1990s. Civilians were allowed to turn in 1000 and higher ruble notes for ecxchange for smaller denominations, but only up to a limit of 1000 rubles. In effect, the Russian government seized ALL personal savings of every citizen, over 1000 rubles.

2. When Iceland began to wobble financially, just last year, Great Britain, afraid of losing deposited assets in Icelandic banks, seized all the UK assets of an Icelandic bank that was doing just fine financially. In effect, when one Icelandic bank tottered, England seized a different bank to prevent Birtish losses.

3. Argentina seized every civilian's retirement account, en masse. One day you had it, the next day the government had it and the banks were closed.

4. Mexico has surprised the citizens with numerous surprise Peso devaluations, and again with numerous surprise declared bank holidays.

5. The IMF repeatedly publicly offered teetering economies bailouts in billions, repeat, publicly. This meant that if the precise terms were not agreed to by the troubled country's government, the IMF would withdraw their public offer. Since the very existence of the public offer created global doubt, better put, global certainty that the teetering economy would collapse without the IMF bailout, the IMF was in a position to demand terms the average person would not comprehend or believe. In many instances, including Turkey,Thailand and Malaysia, IMF demanded that the governments immediately pay off the foreign banks with the loan money, bailing out the IMF member banks first and foremost. Then IMF demanded these economies raise taxes to ecomony crippling levels, just to ensure that the IMF loans would be repaid. In net effect, the IMF forced the countries to the eges, then blackmailed hem into looting their own treasuries for the sole purpose of payijng debts. Think enforced bankruptcy, where the borrower does not collapse per se, but is systematically stripped of all assets. If that's not enough, the IMF also forced these governments to pressure private industries that were doing well, even ineconomically uncertain times. These private industries were sold to IMF partners at penny on the dollar prices. One such example was one of Turkey's newest and best equipped telehone companies.

Bottom line, when the financial system starts to wobble in this day and age, those with money will protect themselves at any cost, and all semblance of laws and governmental guarantees of property and financial rights will evaporate like they never even existed.



Link Posted: 11/3/2009 12:25:38 PM EST

Originally Posted By Mal_means_bad:
Originally Posted By max229:
I don't think things would get as bad now as they did then.

We had too high a percentage of people in farming and manufacturing jobs.

Diversification helps us to avoid major catastrophes.
Yes, the unemployed McDonald's fry station workers, Starbuck's baristas, welfare program data entry clerks, and JC Penny's cashiers will surely make for a diverse and skillful workforce capable of bootstrapping us out of an economic collapse...

So you think that things would be better if we all had similar and low skill oriented jobs?
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 12:34:47 PM EST
[Last Edit: 11/3/2009 12:38:33 PM EST by Mal_means_bad]
Originally Posted By max229:

Originally Posted By Mal_means_bad:
Originally Posted By max229:
I don't think things would get as bad now as they did then.

We had too high a percentage of people in farming and manufacturing jobs.

Diversification helps us to avoid major catastrophes.
Yes, the unemployed McDonald's fry station workers, Starbuck's baristas, welfare program data entry clerks, and JC Penny's cashiers will surely make for a diverse and skillful workforce capable of bootstrapping us out of an economic collapse...

So you think that things would be better if we all had similar and low skill oriented jobs?


The skills involved in the jobs I just mentioned are nearly useless in a non-consumer services, non-welfare state economy. If the economy tanks, which it very well might, whatever is left definitely won't be consumer services based and probably won't be welfare state based (I hope), as neither would be remotely sustainable. Yes, in a Depression it would be better if Joe Average knew more about farming and small engine repair than he does about Big Mac assembly and fry-timing.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 12:36:49 PM EST
People in the 1920's were much more self reliant. They knew how to garden, sew, can, farm, etc. They also weren't used to eating 5,000 calories a day in big macs to begin with, or taking a pill for any tiny ache and pain, and knew what hard labor was. The population was much more rural then and the food distribution was much more localized.

If the great depression happened today, there would be widespread chaos, riots, and probably near famine. The entitlement mentality of much of today's population would create a whole lot of problems, all very bad. I don't think we'd survive it and be the same country ever again honestly.
Link Posted: 11/3/2009 12:51:52 PM EST
As of now from what I have seen on TV, there are a LOT more FAT people standing in the free lunch line, food stamp, welfare/government handout lines, than there were in the 1920's
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top