Opinion World War II Didn't End The Great Depression


A principal goal of Stark Realities is to “expose fundamental myths across the political spectrum” — and few myths are as universally embraced as the notion that US participation in World War II (1941-1945) lifted the American economy out of the Great Depression.

This myth is dangerous not only because it leads citizens and politicians to see a bright side of war that doesn’t really exist, but also because it helps foster a belief that government spending is essential to countering economic downturns. That belief, in turn, has helped propel us to a point where the national debt now exceeds $34.6 trillion, with interest payments alone on pace to reach $1 trillion a year in 2026, inviting financial catastrophe.

In part, the wartime-prosperity myth springs from the fact that, during conflict on the scale of World War II, broad, macroeconomic measures like gross national product (GNP) and the unemployment rate are completely untethered from the economy’s most important facet: the standard of living enjoyed — or endured— by everyday people.

Between 1940 and 1944, real GNP rose at an unprecedented 13% annual clip. Using GNP alone, one would think the war delivered a major improvement in the standard of living, with Americans enjoying a greater abundance of goods, accompanied by a rise in quality, selection and affordability.

The reality was the exact opposite: Americans endured rationing, shortages, declining product quality, and the outright unavailability of many new goods, such as cars, trucks and stoves. This was the inevitable result of factories and raw materials being redirected from the creation of things consumers want to building things like tanks and fighter planes that do nothing whatsoever to improve people’s lives (setting aside the separate issue of the war’s justness).

In many respects, America experienced an outright economic devolution. In the preceding century, industrialization and the division of labor led to enormous increases in productivity. During World War II, however, shortages motivated people who’d contentedly relied on farmers to start growing their own food and canning it. The scarcity of new clothing led homemakers to redirect time and energy to sewing their own garments and resewing them to stretch as much use out them as possible.

“Those remaining on the home front were forced to produce for themselves what they had previously been able to purchase,” wrote Steven Horwitz and Michael J. McPhillips. “The household again became a center of production rather than consumption alone.”

GNP wasn’t the only measure falsely signaling wartime prosperity; employment numbers from the era were likewise misleading. The US unemployment rate plummeted from 17% in 1939 to 1.2% in 1944. Note, however, that military service members are not considered part of the labor force — which means that the draft extracted 11.5 million men from the denominator in the unemployment rate calculation.

Another 6.3 million volunteered, though many signed up because they preferred to secure a role they favored rather than face the chance of being drafted as an infantryman.

While it’s true that draftees and volunteers were “employed” by the armed forces, all these millions of men — no matter how noble their overseas missions may have been — weren’t doing anything to create prosperity at home.

That’s not to say the war machine didn’t demand laborers. With so many able men taken out of the economy, the slack was taken up by teenagers, women and retirees, many who’d have preferred to be doing other things.

In a growing economy, more people are producing goods and services, and elevating standards of living in the process. That was far from the case during World War II. Factories were humming, but they were making bayonets, bombs and battleships. “Four-tenths of the total labor force was not being used to produce consumer goods or capital capable of yielding consumer goods in the future,” noted Robert Higgs.

Defying conventional wisdom about “wartime prosperity,” Americans’ standard of living suffered tremendously from their government’s entry into World War II. In The Reality of the Wartime Economy, Horwitz and McPhillips tapped some interesting source material to bring the grim economic realities of American life during World War II into sharp focus.

For example, a series of newspaper ads placed by Canton Electric Light & Power Company — a local New York State utility — present a vivid, time-lapse portrayal of rapidly declining conditions following the December 1941 declaration of war:
  • Foreshadowing anticipated shortages, a March 17, 1942 ad for appliances is headlined “You Can Still Buy Them.” The ad includes a qualifier that’s upbeat while still signaling creeping scarcity: “We have a fairly good supply.”
  • Just two months later, Canton Electric’s ad says “Now Is The Time” to buy various appliances and equipment, warning that “production of most of these items has stopped and only the supply in your dealers’ stock is available.”
  • Another two months later, a July 1942 ad indicates that some items that were briefly not available are back in inventory.
  • In November of that first year of America’s World War II participation, Canton Electric switched to warning consumers that, “due to the war emergency, it is quite impossible to get replacement motors for civilian use,” and urging them to ensure they’re properly maintaining their “stokers and oil burners.”
  • Later that same month, Canton Electric punted on advancing its retail business altogether, instead using its ad space to encourage readers to grow their own food, eat everything on their plates and comply with ration-stamp rules.
Horwitz and McPhillips also drew on letters written between 1942 and 1945 by Saidee Leach to her son serving in the Pacific. Contrary to the image of prosperity supposedly indicated by leaping GNP or plummeting unemployment, she tells him of:
  • Conserving scarce home-heating fuel during the coldest days by wearing fur coats indoors and residing only in their kitchen
  • Having her typewriter seized by the government, and now using a lesser model she acquired from a Howard Johnson “which had to close due to the ban on pleasure driving.”
  • Making an Easter dinner centered on fried Spam, because she “could not get fresh meat of any kind,” and later noting that “potatoes have entirely disappeared”
  • Local farmers refusing to sell their turkey flocks for Thanksgiving meals at the prices set by the Office of Price Administration — illustrating the folly of government price controls.
That is not the picture of an economy delivered from the Great Depression. Rather, “World War II institutionalized the falling standards of living of the depression through wage and price controls, and extensive rationing of consumer goods and services,” wrote Peter Ferrara. “The economic deprivation, and reduced standards of living, continued, although people perceived it was now for a good cause.”

America’s postwar experience presents another pointed contradiction of the myth of wartime prosperity.

As the war’s end grew closer, Keynesian economists unanimously predicted peace would bring economic disaster. For example, Paul Samuelson said America would experience “the greatest period of unemployment and dislocation any economy has ever faced.”

Alvin Hansen warned that the economy must be kept on a centrally-controlled wartime footing, even in peacetime: "When the war is over, the government cannot just disband the Army, close down munitions factories, stop building ships, and remove all economic control.”

However, that’s pretty much what happened — and Hansen, Samuelson and their fellow economic flat-Earthers couldn’t have been more wrong about the consequences. “The year 1946, when civilian output increased by about 30 percent, was the most glorious single year in the entire history of the U.S. economy,” wrote Higgs.

This despite the fact that government purchases of goods and services collapsed by 68% between the second quarter of 1945 and the first quarter of 1946 — and upwards of a million civilian government employees were laid off and millions of service members discharged.

As war-fighting men poured back into civilian life, millions of women withdrew from the labor force, contentedly returning to duty as mothers and home managers. Rather than soaring as predicted by the “experts,” unemployment merely edged higher, from 1.9% in 1945 to 3.9% in 1947.

“Less than a year and a half after VJ-day,” crowed President Truman, “more than 10 million demobilized veterans and other millions of wartime workers have found employment in the swiftest and most gigantic change-over that any nation has ever made from war to peace.” (Note this happened despite — and in part because of — Truman’s failure to institute a higher minimum wage as the war ended.)

Having been proven enormously wrong about the economic implications of peace, Keynesians scrambled to credit the war with enabling the postwar boom, arguing that it was fueled by people drawing down savings accumulated while the supply of consumer goods was sharply restricted. However, as Higgs determined by studying the data of the time, “Holdings of liquid assets did not decline at all after the war. People financed their spending for consumer goods by reducing their saving rate.”

Contrary to the myth, it was only after World War II that — free from the government’s commandeering of factories, workers and resources, and saddled with fewer price controls and other federal market intrusions — America was finally able to emerge from the Great Depression.

You wouldn’t know that if you evaluated the economy’s health using Keynesians’ preferred measure. Just as the GNP gauge provided a 180-degree misreading of wartime economic realities, it failed in similarly spectacular fashion during the postwar boom: From 1945 to 1947, GNP plummeted 22%.

In addition to further illuminating the shortfalls of aggregate economic measures, America’s postwar economic experience delivered another broadside to the myth of World War II-fostered prosperity, and to the idea that government spending, central planning and market interventions are essential to economic achieving economic recovery.
 
The insertion of the Frankfurt school into every sector of the economy and academia has led directly to the burning shitheap that is the modern world.

The Allied victory was literally the birth of globohomo.

No I'm not saying it would be better if the Axis powers won but the connection is undeniable.
 
I get what the author is trying to argue with this piece -- that getting the government out of the economy is what makes it recover -- but the biggest factor behind the postwar economic growth is the fact that the USA was one of, like, 4 industrial economies on the planet that wasn't bombed back to the stone age or deprived of most of its military-aged population.
 
And FDR's New Deal extended the Great Depression instead of ending it.
This 100%, 7 years according to these people: https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/fdrs-policies-prolonged-depression-by-7-years-ucla

The Great depression would have ended many years sooner were it not for all the manipulation the government was doing. Price of crops too low? just burn them to keep them higher. Too many pigs? Just cull them? Price of cotton to low? lets pay farmers millions to just not plant. Screw Americans starving during the dust bowl.
The disaster time-bomb that is social security, started under FDR.
Gold confiscation, increase taxes, massive manipulation in employment.
The weird way insurance is done in the US with it linked to your employer, you can thank FDR since companies had salary caps, so they started including it into benefit packages to get around that.

Truman removing and ending many of the policies FDR put in place is what actually allowed recovery.

FDR is one the worst president the US has ever had second only to maybe Wilson.

Anyway, these are 14 year old videos and are eternally relevant
 
While we're busting myths about the great depression.

Let's bust the myths that Tariffs caused or exacerbated it with a little math shall we?

debunking_smoot_hawley.png
 
This 100%, 7 years according to these people: https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/fdrs-policies-prolonged-depression-by-7-years-ucla

The Great depression would have ended many years sooner were it not for all the manipulation the government was doing. Price of crops too low? just burn them to keep them higher. Too many pigs? Just cull them? Price of cotton to low? lets pay farmers millions to just not plant. Screw Americans starving during the dust bowl.
The disaster time-bomb that is social security, started under FDR.
Gold confiscation, increase taxes, massive manipulation in employment.
The weird way insurance is done in the US with it linked to your employer, you can thank FDR since companies had salary caps, so they started including it into benefit packages to get around that.

Truman removing and ending many of the policies FDR put in place is what actually allowed recovery.

FDR is one the worst president the US has ever had second only to maybe Wilson.

Anyway, these are 14 year old videos and are eternally relevant
https://youtube.com/watch?v=d0nERTFo-Skhttps://youtube.com/watch?v=GTQnarzmTOc
It is conjectured that the only reason the crash turned into the depression is the fed's meddling. There had been crashes before and things had just been allowed to play out.
 
Keynesianism and socialism will never work. FDR is one of the worst presidents in history and it's disgusting he still has such a positive reputation.

Well I'm saying it. It would be better if the Axis powers won.
The Nazi Economy was FDR's economy on steroids and crack and Hitler stated the only reason he wasn't making it even more socialistic was because he didn't have the needed lebensraum to go full socialism. In the event Hitler somehow won by holding onto the Caucusus oil fields and the Americans not entering the war (His only chance at winning) he would have a nice few years of prosperity due to all the resources he stole until he'd regress back to where he started with shortages and resource mismanagement and this time the Reich is too overextended to maintain. It would most certainly collapse because the idea some 1000 year reich would happen under a socialist state is delusional. It isn't Jewish demon magic blood Marxian Socialism fail, and it won't be Aryan holy magical blood making Socialism the great fulfilment of civilization. Socialism will fail whether it's Jewish, Aryan, Christian, or whatever. It's all deluded bullshit. However it wouldn't fall before it first exported its crumbling economy to its satellite states like what happened historically with Greece and Netherlands. Had the Nazis won World War II, it would just end up with a communist revolution successfully rolling through the entirety Europe by the 1960s.

The best outcome of World War II is Patton isn't assassinated and he pushes for a successful invasion of the Soviets and we aid Chiang Kai Shek in destroying the CCP in its adolescence.

While we're at it, would it be better had Germany , Austria-Hugaria and the Ottoman Empire had won WWI?
The main targets of the banking class in World War I was the Russian Empire and Austria-Hungary. They were the main power centers of Orthodox and Catholic Christianity and of traditional monarchy left in Europe. That's why the Treaty of Trianon was far harsher than Versailles and why Russia was outright eliminated by the Bolsheviks. While the Germans did send Lenin to destabilize Russia, I am not sure if it was out of any greater plans than jut weakening Russia in the war. Had the Central Powers won I would imagine they would enter Russia and eliminate the bolsheviks. The Central Powers winning legitimately might have been a good thing as it would be a victory for Christianity and tradition.
 
Última edición:
The war "ended" the Great Depression because FDR had been artificially keeping it going for years with his retarded New Deal.

Funny how I get to sperg rage about FDR twice today.

deep breath

FDR is the worst president the United States every had and a fucking disgrace to the Founding Fathers. He tried to stack the supreme court in a cartoonishly stupid move and thankfully failed, he signed the NFA with the explicit goal of gun control by making guns unaffordable (200 dollars tax stamps on fucking 1934 dollars) and with provisions to move into making handguns illegal (which never passed because that was impossible to sell to the US public but it's why the NFA and ATF are so retarded about short barrel rifles, the laws against those were made as a precaution for the eventual handgun ban) he fucked the economy for a DECADE and kept the Great Depression going for much longer than needed while insisting on Kenysian bullshit, he directly set the standards and basis for the massive growth and explosion in scope of the federal government, he directly made the American people fat and diabetic by fucking with farming prices in a unconstitutional move and hooking farmers up on a addictive drug called subsides, FDR's administration marked the beginning of the rise of the administrative state where rules made up by administrators and civil servants who aren't elected or voted on and whose rulings you have no say or representation or right to a fair trial were implemented in direct violation to the Constitution marking the beginning of the administrative state, he had literal communist agents of the USSR on his administration like Charles Dexter White and Alger Hiss and his VP during WW2 Wallace might as well have been a paid NKVD plant for how naively stupid he was at trusting Stalin, he fell for British propaganda about Nazis wanting to establish Reichskomissariats in South and Central America like a complete retard and pushed for the USA to get involved into world politics despite the public not wanting him to (British rigged the GOP Convention of 1940 to ensure that the Republican Candidate was a literal who Alf Landon because he shared this international view so they could rely on America to keep funding their European war), his court packing was done because he knew his plans were unconstitutional and when they were eventually struck down he worked his propaganda to reword them slightly and get it passed again, FDR popularized and expanded the absurd idea of "the good of the nation" as a standard to rule if things are constitutional or not instead of the actual fucking law because he knew his bullshit was illegal and wanted it passed anyway, his entire presidency was as close to fascism as the USA ever came with his attacks on the freedom of the press and people by being a complete retard and having his buddies in business and media hide criticisms by de-funding and blacklisting editors and opinion columns, he took the Business Plot kerfufle and made it into a media blitz to pretend he was some sort of "common man" when most of those implicated in the plot would then proceed to work alongside him wonderfully as soon as it calmed down. There is a damn good reason faggots like Obama lionize the cripple fuck he was actively destroying the USA to remake it as a European style social democracy with big government and small citizens. The only thing he ever deserved was goddamn Polio and the world would be a much better place if he had died from it.

Fuck FDR.
 
Última edición:
No. The USA not only produced enough to supply themselves, but greatly assisted many other countries, especially the UK and the USSR. We sent a huge amount of food to those countries. Sent hundreds of thousands of trucks and jeeps to the USSR. Sent seeds to the USSR to help replant devastated farming areas. The list goes on.

Read The Taste Of War, by Lizzie Collingham. Covers the food situation in the US/UK/Japan/China/Germany/certain Axis-occupied countries. I can assure you that Americans ate better than people in any of the other countries mentioned in the book. There was rationing and shortages but nobody starved, people still drove, did things for pleasure. Sears had their Christmas Wish Books throughout the war, for example.

Yes, WWII ended the Depression here.
 
No. The USA not only produced enough to supply themselves, but greatly assisted many other countries, especially the UK and the USSR. We sent a huge amount of food to those countries. Sent hundreds of thousands of trucks and jeeps to the USSR. Sent seeds to the USSR to help replant devastated farming areas. The list goes on.

Read The Taste Of War, by Lizzie Collingham. Covers the food situation in the US/UK/Japan/China/Germany/certain Axis-occupied countries. I can assure you that Americans ate better than people in any of the other countries mentioned in the book. There was rationing and shortages but nobody starved, people still drove, did things for pleasure. Sears had their Christmas Wish Books throughout the war, for example.

Yes, WWII ended the Depression here.
There's a rite of passage in UK schools where at some point in the compulsory dull "life in WW2" project, the poor teacher will do the activity where either the class has to eat the things available under rationing, or has to try and cook food using only the stuff off the ration card.

No lime tisane and madeleines for us, but generations have never forgotten that spoonful of bloody made-up powdered egg. Christ on a bicycle
 
While we're at it, would it be better had Germany , Austria-Hugaria and the Ottoman Empire had won WWI?
Most likely. There would have been no Treaty of Versailles to inflict the Weimar Republic upon a victorious Germany and hence no Nazi/Commie street fisticuffs, hyperinflation, and all the rest of it. Arguably Adolf Hitler might still have gone into the political scene, but that's debatable since the absence of Weimar Germany would (probably, anyway) eliminate the conditions that fertilized the soil for the Nazis. It would be a massively, unimaginably, different world had Burgerland just not voted that fuckstick Wilson into power and just stayed neutral, arming both sides regardless of British whining about how it was somehow 'unfair' for a neutral country to act all...y'know, fucking neutral.

Would it be better? Dunno. There likely would have been massive consequences for Austria-Hungary given how weak the dual monarchy already was by the 1910s, plenty of ethnic tension waiting to boil over and blow up in that stew pot of east-central Europe. Would there have been a Second World War, though? I kind of doubt it, but there's no way to be sure of that given the unknown unknown of the Inverse Treaty of Versailles that would have at least attempted (probably) to punish the shit out of France.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo