The
Disaster Called the New Deal
by
David Gordon
by David Gordon
DIGG THIS
New
Deal or Raw Deal? How FDR's Economic Legacy Has Damaged America.
By Burton Folsom, Jr. Threshold Editions, 2008. Xvi + 318 pages.
Readers of
The Mises Review will not be surprised to learn that Folsom considers
the New Deal a failure. Nevertheless, even those already familiar
with such books as John T. Flynn's The
Roosevelt Myth will find Folsom's book valuable. Folsom
advances new and important arguments.
His antiNew
Deal verdict is hard to dispute: levels of unemployment at the end
of the 1930s remained at depression levels. In May 1939, Treasury
Secretary Henry J. Morgenthau Jr., one of Franklin Roosevelt's best
friends, testified before the House Ways and Means Committee: "I
say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much
unemployment as when we started
And an enormous debt to boot"
(p. 2). When he spoke, unemployment exceeded 20 percent. Further,
and here Folsom has absorbed the pioneering research of Robert Higgs,
not even the onset of World War II ended the Depression. True enough,
unemployment ended; but this was only because of the draft. Absent
this military slavery, there is every reason to think that Roosevelt
would have continued to struggle with unemployment.
A
diehard defender of Roosevelt might essay two replies to this indictment.
He might argue that Roosevelt was insufficiently far-reaching: despite
his radical reputation, Roosevelt only reluctantly embraced the
Keynesian prescription of increased public spending. Roosevelt did
indeed spend a great deal on government programs; but this must
be balanced against his tax increases. When the two are taken together,
the stimulus that New Deal outlays provided the economy was less
than needed to restore prosperity. William Leuchtenburg, one of
the most influential historians of the New Deal, favors this approach.
"The
havoc that had been done before Roosevelt took office," Leuchtenburg
argues, "was so great that even the unprecedented measures
of the New Deal did not suffice to repair the damage."
Some historians say that FDR should have done more deficit spending
during the recession of 1937. (p. 12)
Copyright ©
2008 Ludwig von Mises Institute
David
Gordon Archives
|