The new goverment focus on the reform of economic and friendly diplomatism. And most Anericans expectec that this new goverment's New Deal will be as effective as the Roosevelt government's new deal to pull the United States out of the g economic depression.

Actually, if you read up on U.S. History and forgo the hype created by historians with a Democratic view to sell, Roosevelt made the Depression worse when he first came into office because of the mistakes he made.

And, it was WWII that helped rejuvenate the economy in a major way by making manufacturing jobs, munition jobs, etc. to prepare for the war. That's the view that many have taken of Roosevelt since time has elapsed since his governing.........that's the view behind the myth that he knew of the Pearl Harbor attack ahead of time (possibly not realizing how massively damaging it would be).......so he could sell the isolationists into agreeing to go to war in order to rebuild the economy.

You know what, Solo? You sound a lot like John L. Is it also your anti-left theory that we should have left the market alone during the 30's, so that it (market) would have straighten itself out? Just curious about this.

Actually, Grizz, I've got my sources probably from the same source as JohnL. probably does. Really, I don't know what he reads or care. History has a way of getting read and believed......it's a problem with history, you know? It clarifies myths and such.

I have no opinion on the markets during the 30's. I was talking about the Depression/FDR myth. You need to read some new history. It works wonders with developing insight.

BTW, I'm putting you on Ignore. You are useless to talk to. Byeee. You and TQ, and Tokis can all talk together..........errrrrr........slurr BearPit members together. Have a good time.

Hate to see ........whatever relation we had end, but alas! I need a mind to talk to, not a used carbon copy of liberal rags.

No matter Barack Obama or John Mc Cain win the general election the the New Deal will be brought into effect.And the policy of Bush Goerment will be abandoned totally. The candidate of the Democratic Party Barack Obama claimeed that in order to regain the confidence of the money market, the raform of the supervise to the Wall Street is necessary and very important.He said that he will make related plans if he can heading to White House.

As mass production has to be accompanied by mass consumption, mass consumption, in turn, implies a distribution of wealth -- not of existing wealth, but of wealth as it is currently produced -- to provide men with buying power equal to the amount of goods and services offered by the nation's economic machinery. [Emphasis in original.] Instead of achieving that kind of distribution, a giant suction pump had by 1929-30 drawn into a few hands an increasing portion of currently produced wealth. This served them as capital accumulations. But by taking purchasing power out of the hands of mass consumers, the savers denied to themselves the kind of effective demand for their products that would justify a reinvestment of their capital accumulations in new plants. In consequence, as in a poker game where the chips were concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, the other fellows could stay in the game only by borrowing. When their credit ran out, the game stopped. That is what happened to us in the twenties. We sustained high levels of employment in that period with the aid of an exceptional expansion of debt outside of the banking system. This debt was provided by the large growth of business savings as well as savings by individuals, particularly in the upper-income groups where taxes were relatively low. Private debt outside of the banking system increased about fifty per cent. This debt, which was at high interest rates, largely took the form of mortgage debt on housing, office, and hotel structures, consumer installment debt, brokers' loans, and foreign debt. The stimulation to spending by debt-creation of this sort was short-lived and could not be counted on to sustain high levels of employment for long periods of time. Had there been a better distribution of the current income from the national product -- in other words, had there been less savings by business and the higher-income groups and more income in the lower groups -- we should have had far greater stability in our economy. Had the six billion dollars, for instance, that were loaned by corporations and wealthy individuals for stock-market speculation been distributed to the public as lower prices or higher wages and with less profits to the corporations and the well-to-do, it would have prevented or greatly moderated the economic collapse that began at the end of 1929. The time came when there were no more poker chips to be loaned on credit. Debtors thereupon were forced to curtail their consumption in an effort to create a margin that could be applied to the reduction of outstanding debts. This naturally reduced the demand for goods of all kinds and brought on what seemed to be overproduction, but was in reality underconsumption when judged in terms of the real world instead of the money world. This, in turn, brought about a fall in prices and employment. Unemployment further decreased the consumption of goods, which further increased unemployment, thus closing the circle in a continuing decline of prices. Earnings began to disappear, requiring economies of all kinds in the wages, salaries, and time of those employed. And thus again the vicious circle of deflation was closed until one third of the entire working population was unemployed, with our national income reduced by fifty per cent, and with the aggregate debt burden greater than ever before, not in dollars, but measured by current values and income that represented the ability to pay. Fixed charges, such as taxes, railroad and other utility rates, insurance and interest charges, clung close to the 1929 level and required such a portion of the national income to meet them that the amount left for consumption of goods was not sufficient to support the population. This then, was my reading of what brought on the depression.

Real Earnings

Economists expected a 0.4 percent increase in the consumer price index, based on the median of 63 forecasts in a Bloomberg survey. Forecasts ranged from increases of 0.2 percent to 0.6 percent. Core prices were forecast to rise 0.2 percent.

The Treasury's 4 1/4 percent note maturing in August 2015 rose 1/8, pushing down the yield 2 basis points to 4.27 percent at 8:45 a.m. in New York.

Workers' earnings adjusted for inflation declined 0.2 percent in July, the fourth drop in the last six months, after a 0.3 percent rise in June, the Labor Department said in a separate release. The June decrease suggests consumers have less spending power.

Consumer prices were up 3.2 percent for the 12 months ended in July compared with a 2.5 percent year-over-year gain the previous month. Core prices were 2.1 percent higher compared with a 2 percent year-over-year increase in June.