Lets take a play from your book and I'll ask you something random..ish.yes it is actually something you ignored over the whole argument but it is pretty funny watching you tell your line of regurgitated nonsense
Yes that must be it! Harry Reid was in a close race with a retard means he is so awesome! Its fine he can be the new punching bag for the next election.Harry Reid stays. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif Shows how retarded the republican candidates are.
Okay, but the government was still buying those tanks,planes,etc correct? It wasn't starbucks or best buy buying them? It was the federal government buying them, right?We already went over this and before you spew more lies those factories were not nationalized!
Are you sure you want to go down this road? Are you trying to claim these companies were nationalized? Either way you want to go it was the government leaning on the private sector to produce. Somewhere in your crossed thought pattern you lose the fact that government does not have money, they spend ours. All the money they collect yearly is our money. Are you some sort of neo-communist or what?I'm pretty sure they don't. So it is the government buying them, right? Taxpayer money is buying those tanks and planes, that people are hired to produce? Yes?
I'm pretty sure they don't. So it is the government buying them, right? Taxpayer money is buying those tanks and planes, that people are hired to produce? Yes?
Wow you are dense! How the hell is a manufacturing job a temp job if all that was switched is what was manufactured? You think it was government planing? How does a road make money? Toll road? A dam makes money? That is one long assed time frame of return on investment LOL. You have changed stances in your argument, you said it was the new deal and liberal economics when in fact it was the government needing the private sector to produce. You can keep on trying to bastardize the facts of the matter hell you are already changing what your original argument was. When the government wants a fighter jet they pay companies like Lockheed for it and not open up US Air Force Manufacturing as a factory with government employees.Because you're obviously too scared to answer me easy questions, I'll just spell it out for you. It doesn't matter what the factories were or what happened to them before or after the war. The point is the government spent an enormous amount of money funding TEMPORARY job creation (either through buying tanks or building highways or dams), and that created enough demand in the marketplace for private businesses to need to hire people so when the government stopped funding those TEMPORARY jobs, the economy was able to support itself.
That is what happened, and it is proof that liberal economics work. When the people don't spend, the government NEEDS to spend to get us out of the recession. You don't just give money to rich people expecting them to start hiring people for no reason from the goodness of their hearts. Depressions are caused by people not spending money (because they don't have money because they don't have jobs) which decreases overall demand in an economy. Companies only hire/expand when the demand warrants it, so to get an economy out of a recession, government needs to spend money.
Again, the great depression/world war II is proof of this, and proof that it works.