Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Hoover's advisors contributed to FDR's first banking legislation and FDR was opposed to the FDIC

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 03:16 PM
Original message
Hoover's advisors contributed to FDR's first banking legislation and FDR was opposed to the FDIC
Edited on Mon Jun-28-10 03:25 PM by ProSense
He closed all the banks in the country and kept them all closed until he could pass new legislation.<16> On March 9, Roosevelt sent to Congress the Emergency Banking Act, drafted in large part by Hoover's top advisors. The act was passed and signed into law the same day. It provided for a system of reopening sound banks under Treasury supervision, with federal loans available if needed. Three-quarters of the banks in the Federal Reserve System reopened within the next three days. Billions of dollars in hoarded currency and gold flowed back into them within a month, thus stabilizing the banking system. By the end of 1933, 4,004 small local banks were permanently closed and merged into larger banks. (Their depositors eventually received on average 86 cents on the dollar of their deposits; it is a common false myth that they received nothing back.) In June, over Roosevelt's objections, Congress created the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), which insured deposits for up to $2,500.

link


The U.S. Deposit Insurance System

The first national deposit insurance system in the world was the FDIC. It was created in 1933 during the Great Depression to restore public confidence in the U.S. financial system and to protect small depositors. At the time of its creation, the U.S. was in the midst of the largest financial crisis in its history. During the first few months of 1933, 4,000 U.S. banks suspended operations. Bank runs had become commonplace and President Roosevelt was forced to impose a national banking holiday. The issue of the moment was how to restore confidence in the banking system.

When the FDIC was created, there was no national system of deposit insurance in the world. President Roosevelt actually opposed its creation, even threatened to veto the legislation that was to create the FDIC. He was concerned about the moral hazard that can occur when protection extended to depositors makes them less diligent in the selection and monitoring of their banks, and makes banks less careful in their lending practices. Banking industry groups also opposed the FDIC's creation because they were concerned about the premiums their members might have to pay.

But the American public demanded a system of deposit insurance that would provide a safe place for people to put their money. The public had experienced widespread bank runs and did not want to have that experience again. Broad public support overcame the obstacles to the creation of the FDIC.

Without a doubt, the FDIC helped restore public confidence in the U.S. financial system. In 1934, the year after the FDIC was created, only nine banks failed compared to 4,000 bank closures during the nine months prior to its creation. Deposit insurance effectively ended bank runs in the U.S. The FDIC is widely viewed as one of the most successful legacies of that era, and remains highly relevant to the challenges facing the U.S. financial system today.

link




Edited title.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
1. Proof that FDR wasn't as good as Richard Nixon, by DU standards. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
2. "Pulled a Hoover"? -- Why are you smearing a Democrat's legacy?
"Puled a Hoover"?

You might as well say there is no difference between him and Bush?

You might as well just alert your own post for breaking DU rules.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. "You might as well say there is no difference between him and Bush?"
But I will never do that.

And to ensure that this doesn't become a point of contention, I'm going to edit the title.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. "I'm going to edit the title"
Edited on Mon Jun-28-10 03:26 PM by Oregone
The sentiment still stands. You are clearly grouping FDR and Hoover in the same light in an attempt to smear FDR's legacy.

What is your issue with FDR? Did his past leftist policies cast shame on the current ones? Is his inconvenient existence and embarrassment to you?

He is dead and rotting? Why now do you insist to tear down the man who helmed this country through terrible times? What is your agenda?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. People act as if FDR's shit didn't stink and bash Obama
CONSTANTLY by saying "he's no FDR."

Well, no shit. Even the real FDR wasn't the superhero FDR that the Obama-bashers at DU love to worship.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Everyone's shit stinks. Some try and do something about it
Edited on Mon Jun-28-10 03:30 PM by Oregone
Lets ostracize those that try, eh?

There was a huge, organized leftist movement AGAINST FDR. They influenced his policies in positive ways, helping to make him a very successful president who worked in the interests of the people overall.

That leftist group is repressed, silenced and shamed currently, such that they are not influencing policy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #10
17. Pushing from the left is great.
I don't think anyone objects to advocacy and calls to push the current admin to the left.

It's the derision, the insults, and the constant need to belittle the current admin and write it off as a force for evil that get's people upset.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Well, the need to belittle the legacy of FDR is no less disgusting
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #19
47. Now perhaps you understand what Obama
supporters and admirers (I am the former, not the latter, but I respect both) go through every single day here.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. This OP is about smearing FDR
Why do people keep trying to change the subject to current day woes?

Hey, I guess you are right though. Two wrongs certainly make a right. Sure
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #48
49. Actually, I suspect the OP was about
showing people that it's absurd to trash any Democratic president as being a Hooverite.

Also, extolling Richard Nixon's virtues at the expense of Democrats is also not a good idea.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #49
50. How does saying FDR "pulled a Hoover"
show "people that it's absurd to trash any Democratic president as being a Hooverite."

Some people can't even recognize a bold-faced smear. Theyd rather make excuses for the excuses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. "You are clearly grouping FDR and Hoover in the same light in an attempt to smear FDR's legacy."
No, that's what you want to believe. "Why are you smearing a Democrat's legacy?"

Are you as concerned about the constant comparisons of President Obama to Bush?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. "Are you as concerned about..."
Why are you changing the subject. This OP is about smearing FDR. :)


:dunce:


Or wait...did you smear him as part of a broader agenda to bolster the current president?


Is this allowed at DU? Should it be?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
4. Is this what we've come to?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Do you object to fact-based discussions or
attacks on Democrats?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. Yes. FDR's inconvenient existence shames current "left"-leaning policies
His tenure, when examined, reveals just how of course "liberals" have driven.

Rather than correct course, its easier to smear his legacy, such that current Democrats look better in contrast
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. This is rich
"Rather than correct course, its easier to smear his legacy, such that current Democrats look better in contrast"

No one is smearing FDR's legacy. A fact is a fact.

President Obama did not push single payer because he believes he did not have the votes. That is a fact.

Facts are not inconvenient.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. "because he believes"
Edited on Mon Jun-28-10 03:36 PM by Oregone
You don't know what he really believes. No one does.

What I do know that is a fact is that you are grouping FDR and Hoover together. This is a shameful smear. You should be embarrassed

Stop trying to change the subject. This OP is not about Obama, but how terrible and Hooveresque FDR really is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. "You don't know what he really believes. "
I know what he said.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. "I know what he said. "
Edited on Mon Jun-28-10 03:42 PM by Oregone
You know what a politician said? Wow. Well ain't that special.

We know a lot about what FDR said, and yet he is apparently so much like the Republican fuck-face Hoover that he "pulled a Hoover" on the banks. That is the point of the OP, right?

Does that make you want to build a time machine and go vote for Huey Long or something?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. You know, the "pulled a Hoover" intro was short and sarcastic
You want to make it into something sinister and use it to distract from the point: FDR incorporated some ideas from Hoover into his first banking bill and he opposed the FDIC.

Now, do you want to discuss those facts?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. Oh, wasn't that cute and funny then
Thats makes it ok to smear the Hooveresque FDR then.


"do you want to discuss those facts"

I don't "discuss" in smear threads.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #4
20. Here is something you might find interesting
This was originally posted here

While the New Deal did much to lessen the worst affects of the Great Depression, its measures were not sweeping enough to restore the nation to full employment. Critics of FDR's policies, on both the right and the left, use this fact as a reason to condemn it. Conservatives argue, for example, that it went too far, and brought too much government intervention in the economy, while those on the left argue that it did not go far enough, and that in order to be truly effective, the Roosevelt Administration should have engaged in a far more comprehensive program of direct federal aid to the poor and unemployed. But the New Deal's greatest achievements transcend mere economic statistics, for in a world where democracy was under siege, and the exponents of fascism and communism flourished, the New Deal offered hope and restored the faith of the American people in their representative institutions. It also transformed the federal government into an active instrument of social justice and established a network of laws and institutions designed to protect the American economy from the worst excesses of liberal capitalism.

One of the most striking benefits of the New Deal was that it restored the confidence of a deeply discouraged population. FDR's use of the media, particularly his mastery of radio communication with the American people through his "Fireside Chats," restored the spirit of the nation as he worked to lift the economy out of the Great Depression.


Obviously, the left in FDR's time felt equally compelled to criticize the President, and his policy turned out to be historically significant.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #20
26. Why would I find another of your FDR denigrating posts interesting?
Edited on Mon Jun-28-10 04:30 PM by laughingliberal
This one is nauseating enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #26
32. Wait, was the comment directed to you? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #32
33. No. It's directed at an OP with talking points straight from FOX news. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. The point about the FDIC is from the FDIC site.
As far as I know, they are not Fox Noise.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #34
37. Fox News was 24/7 rewriting FDR's legacy and the results of the new deal around the inauguration.
You appear to be doing the same.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 04:13 PM
Response to Original message
21. Worthy of Fox. Hoover's policies pulled us out of the depression.
Yeah, around the time of the inauguration, Fox was spinning 24/7 on how the New Deal didn't help turn the depression around and, actually, prolonged it. I'm sure they'd like to have this forwarded to them. I'm also reminded of when Clinton's economic recovery act began working and the Republicans claimed it was just Bush's policies starting to work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. Please don't attempt to change the subject.
Edited on Mon Jun-28-10 04:15 PM by ProSense
Fact: the TARP was initiated by the Bush administration. The Obama adminstration took the necessary steps to make it work.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. Change the subject? You changed the title already
Edited on Mon Jun-28-10 04:17 PM by Oregone
The subject is about how FDR "pulled a Hoover".

This OP is ALL about how much FDR is like Hoover--how this great Democrat is similar to a fuck-face Republican.

Why are you trying to obfuscate your own smear thread?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. So? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. The subject for me is a smear on FDR worthy of Fox. In fact, I'd be surprised if Fox hadn't run
this. They also claimed Clinton's excellent economy was Bush I's policies starting to work. Just because our current President has, for whatever reason, not adopted some New Deal types of policies to get the working class back on their feet, does not mean I'm about to start smearing FDR. It's disgusting and transparent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #25
30. +1million It is not necessary to defend President Obama by denigrating FDR
It is just sick the obsession some have with comparing two men who actually have little in common.President Obama should be praised or criticized for his own administration not another's. Some started out comparing him to JFK because of his relative youth.When that didn't fly, FDR was brought into the picture. History should not be viewed the prism of any current administration.Each presidency stands on its own merits.History has yet to determine what president Obama's legacy will be. With less than a term under his belt, he is not in the league of a three term president, who ranks as one of our greatest. Obama actions will speak for themselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. Have you seen
these two?

They're quite interesting.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #31
35. I suppose it's good you find your links to your own posts interesting. Me? Not so much. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. Thanks for sharing. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #35
39. A bit egocentric as well. Wonder why the objection to "stand alone" evaluation?
There is no way to make these comparisons. Different times , different men, different personalities. We don't compare George Washington to Harry Truman, or John Adams to LBJ.Nothing really gets my goat more than when people try to analyze yesterday through the telescope of today and make analogies where there are done. History often doesn't make its decisions until many years afterward.it is extremely presumptuous to be making this comparison halfway through a first term.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #39
40. "There is no way to make these comparisons. " There is a way
and Presidential historians do it all the time.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #40
42. Really. Truman to Washington? Seriously? Whatever.
Some have a prism through which everything is seen. Things are a lot clearer when the filter is off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #42
43. Yes, broad comparisons. They compared Obama to Lincoln.
Why so shocked? That's what Presidential historians live to do.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 04:36 PM
Response to Original message
27. Hilarious in its transparency.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 04:38 PM
Response to Original message
28. Cause Hoover gets a bad rep. I would say there are worse Rethugs.
His interventions were too late and not enough. But he intervened, a no no to Coolidge who couldn't stand him.
Of course, FDR realized that a President had to majorly intervene.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. Hoover gets a bad rep??? Now, I have heard it all. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #29
38. Yeah. I mean, there are worse Rethugs out there, not that Hoover was wonderful.
My understanding was that Hoover is largely believed to have gotten a bum rap. His policies weren't enough, but they thrust in the right direction. He called industrialists to the White House and used the threat of regulation to force them to maintain wages, even getting Henry Ford to increase pay; he expanded public work projects and extracted promises of private infrastructure investment in order to accelerate job growth; he sought higher farm prices and increased government spending. In the overall, he did far too little, but his worst sins were of scale, not misjudgement. As for his largest blunder, the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act wasn't the world's wisest decision, I agree, but I'd been under the impression that its significance had largely been overstated, at least so far as worsening the Depression went.http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/ezraklein_archive?month=11&year=2007&base_name=horrible_herbert_hoover

Hoover did not go far enough in intervening but intervene he did. FDR just did more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #38
41. I suppose the lesson here is the danger of not going far enough. I fear we are on the verge of
learning that all over again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dinger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-10 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #29
51. Me Too (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 08:15 PM
Response to Original message
44. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
joe black Donating Member (514 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #44
46. Me too.
Some folks should talk to the older generation about FDR. they still have high praise for him. My mom's one of them that lived during his time, she can still tear up talking about how good a president he was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-10 08:57 PM
Response to Original message
45. My favorite slant,
"Billions of dollars in hoarded currency and gold flowed back into them within a month, thus stabilizing the banking system."

Yes, it flowed all right...
:rofl:



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 08:13 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC