Coming together to give change a chance
By Jerry Giorgi
I have heard that Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal did not end the Great Depression, that it was really World War II. This is partly true. However, World War II was, in itself, a gigantic stimulus package.
The most important message FDR gave us was hope and confidence in our government. He showed that government does care for all its citizens — businesses, the unemployed, homeless, elderly and poor — and that he would do all he could to end their pain. I believe this is exactly what the Obama administration is trying to do today.
What really ended the Great Depression was a combination of fair taxes, government programs, World War II and a concerted effort by all citizens of this nation. Franklin Roosevelt gave us a unity of purpose and faith in our government that we could get the job done.
Obama has been in office just a few weeks and the obstructionists are already doing everything in their power to tear down the change that most Americans want. He has established a special bond between the presidency and the American people. Obama believes in democracy and the free market, and the capacity of Americans to address their ills affecting society. He refuses to accept that government invariably bungles whatever is attempted, and this refusal has inspired new ideas and government efforts that will have a positive effect on our country.
Will Obama get everything right? Nobody can, but most of what he does will be right. And if he makes mistakes he is presidential enough to admit it and take proper action.
He says he believes that old age need not be accompanied by poverty, and that receiving government help is not a brand of failure but a temporary step toward success. All of us may need help during our lifetime, even corporations and banks.
There are some, when their arguments fade, that resort to placing labels on everyone who disagrees with their ideology. Let’s forget the labels and examine the ideas of others on whether these ideas are right or wrong for our nation. Let’s start thinking more about what is best for our country, not what is best for our party or winning elections.
Let’s give our new leader a chance, and then if we are worse off at the end of his term, we can elect someone else. Let’s give change a chance. Isn’t that what most of us voted for?
How sad that FDR’s programs, and the millions that it helped and is still helping, have to be debated again, especially in these hard times.
I lived through the Depression and the hardships that we had to endure: the millions that were out of work, the unemployed who came to my mom and dad’s farm asking only to work for food. My parents never let anyone leave their farm hungry.
I was a youngster at that time and I used to get excited when someone who was unemployed (Pa would call them “gentlemen of the road”) would arrive. It was so interesting for me to hear their stories about how many of them once enjoyed prosperity, and now because of no fault of their own needed help.
Pa used to tell me a story that prior to getting married to my mother, he once baked delicious pancakes under a bridge near Santa Rosa, for his friends. He was loved by everyone in Sonoma, and I am not surprised that at one time he could have been a “gentleman of the road.”
Homeless victims of that era were educated individuals, farm workers, railroad workers, factory workers, all walks of life, who worked hard at anything that came along. They were not bums, as we all realized that it could just as easily have been us traveling that same route. It was an education that lasted all my life.
However, there is something very different now than in the 1930s, something that will help us through this terrible economic crisis:
1) Social Security, which has helped so many millions of Americans.
2) Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, which has protected the American citizen from losing their life savings.
3) Workers’ compensation, which has helped thousands of workers who have lost their jobs.
4) The Wagner Act and the Taft Hartley Act, which protect the rights of workers.
5) The GI Bill of Rights, which gave thousands of servicemen and women an opportunity for a college education and the ability to purchase a new home, which went far in establishing our middle class.
We now have our chance — Republicans, Democrats, Independents, all Americans — to unite in debate as a nation, not to settle old scores or enhance our pocketbook but to bring this nation forward so all may benefit.
Let’s have a unity of purpose, for ourselves, our nation and the world.
(Giorgi lives in Napa.)ꆱ
The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.
What gets your comment posted?
• Staying on topic
• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less
• Avoiding name-calling
• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger
What gets your comment deleted?
• Personal attacks
• Derogatory remarks
• Name-calling of any sort
• Going off-topic
• Hate speech
• Racially-insensitive comments
• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict
• Posting e-mail addresses
• Posting comments of a commercial nature
• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.
The fine print
- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.
- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.
- Comments may take several hours to be posted.
- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.
- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our
virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.
- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact
online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.
napablogger wrote on Mar 6, 2009 1:12 AM:
another voice wrote on Mar 6, 2009 6:05 AM:
And I like the new change of just taking over solvent organizations, too. Like all the poor people who were in the private school loan business the president has just nationalized. Sorry to all those people who are now unemployed in an industry that was not broken. And his statesman like actions including giving the bust of Churchill back to the Brits, and in exchange for a pen holder made from the timbers of an anti-slave ship, our sophisticated president reciprocated with a DVD collection of American movies. Classy. Real Classy.
I think leveling the playing field in Mr Obama's book is really just bringing us all down to the lowest common denominator.
And with the FDIC now broke, are you taking your money out of the bank today, or tomorrow?
I am not an obstructionist. I am just scared silly. "
common sense wrote on Mar 6, 2009 6:56 AM:
The big-government liberalism promoted by Obama is NOT change. It is the same old garbage that we've fought against before. It doesn't work, it never has, and it won't this time. The question I have is...how long will it take for America to wake up and recognize what is going on? "
rpcv wrote on Mar 6, 2009 7:14 AM:
JustAnotherManicMonday wrote on Mar 6, 2009 7:32 AM:
antipc wrote on Mar 6, 2009 7:58 AM:
Doing what’s best for the country is not the strong suit of the party in charge & working with republicans & independents is the last thing they are going to do. They see this as an opportunity to further the socialist agenda while punishing the responsible productive sector with higher taxation, not to mention generations of debt.
At the current rate of spending I don’t think we afford to wait four years to replace the President. "
Raven wrote on Mar 6, 2009 8:16 AM:
O/U now wrote on Mar 6, 2009 8:19 AM:
Common Sense wrote on Mar 6, 2009 8:53 AM:
Ruff Limblog wrote on Mar 6, 2009 8:54 AM:
It's a pity to hear Republican voices 'talking down' the banking system at the same time they complain about the president supposedly doing so.
What's really sad is to hear the same old bunkum being pushed that "Tax Cuts Will Cure EVERYTHING!" when eight years of Bushite-Hoover policies is exactly what ruined the country.
~Ruff "
antipc wrote on Mar 6, 2009 9:11 AM:
Madison Jay Hamilton wrote on Mar 6, 2009 9:56 AM:
I purchased a home in Napa through the FHA. That program worked for me!
Unemployment was at 23.5% when FDR took office. Unemployment was down to about 9% in 1940, well before the US entered World War II.
Wars are not good for the economy. World War II did not help the US economy. Indeed, the US invasion of Iraq has been an economic catastrophe for both the US and Iraq.
FDR's SEC helped to restore credibility to the financial markets during the Great Depression. I'd like to see the SEC begin doing its job again.
President Obama's recently proposed budget ought to be supported by both GOPers and Democrats. "
Bauhausfan wrote on Mar 6, 2009 9:59 AM:
And you are suggesting it is Obama's fault, I presume, and nothing to do with Bush and the Republican policies that created this mess?
I am sure, in hardcore conservative minority of this country, roughly 20-25% of the population they will believe this, but most people, know what brought us to where we are. "
freeport56 wrote on Mar 6, 2009 10:33 AM:
ROOSEVELT PRE-WWII NEW DEAL
1932 Unemployment Rate: 23.6% (12.8 million total unemployed)
1940 Unemployment Rate: 14.6% (8.1 million total unemployed)
Unemployment Rate Change: -9.0
Total unemployment percentage change: -36.7%
Source-David Sirota
Your numberas are a liitle shy of the truth. WWII . From 1941 to 1944 the unemployment rate dropped to 1.2% as the the War Time production effort was under way. The WPA were employed by the Government and did not do any private sector work. The WPA was a public works construction arm of the federal government. Government jobs do not stimulate the economy, innovation and manufacturing in the private sector do. Money in the pockets of businesses and individuals do. Socialism depresses an economy. As do the Presidents fiscal-pull-it-out -of-hat policies. "
altered ego wrote on Mar 6, 2009 11:48 AM:
I like that, hear ye! "
Mr4 wrote on Mar 6, 2009 11:48 AM:
Very sweet but tragically naive.
All those programs come from our big hearts and have served the Greatest Generation well. We'll just ignore all of future generations that have only begun to pay for it.
The utopian ideals have been tried and tried again - always with the same result.
But maybe this time if we all hold hands and sing Cumbaya with real love everything will come out rainbows and ice cream! "
Raven wrote on Mar 6, 2009 12:42 PM:
cab e-girl wrote on Mar 6, 2009 2:45 PM:
cab e-girl wrote on Mar 6, 2009 3:15 PM:
Obama; however sold his Presidency on the economic downturn and his ability to turn the economy around. He VOLUNTEERED for the job and promised that his way was the best way. Certainly the DJI, which has dropped from 9500 when he took office, to it's current 6600 does not have much HOPE in his ability to turn things around. The market looks forward, not back and that should be a red flag all of us. His radical and out of control spending has not impressed investors, nor does it impress me. Instead of crying about not being responsible for the state of the economy, we would like to see some leadership owning up to the responsibility of the job Obama fought so hard to get elected to. "
kevin wrote on Mar 6, 2009 5:20 PM:
"Look at the incredible decline in the stock market, in all indices, since the inauguration of the president, with the drop accelerating when the budget plan came to light because of the massive fear and indecision the document sowed: Raising taxes on the eve of what could be a second Great Depression, destroying the profits in healthcare companies (one of the few areas still robust in the economy), tinkering with the mortgage deduction at a time when U.S. house price depreciation is behind much of the world's morass and certainly the devastation affecting our banks, and pushing an aggressive cap and trade program that could raise the price of energy for millions of people."
The only question I have is how someone so smart could have been fooled into voting for B.O. in the first place... "
PlasticPinkFlamingo wrote on Mar 6, 2009 5:52 PM:
It was ACORN, Schumer, Waters, and Frank pressuring mortgage lenders to give mortgages to people who could not make the payments.
It was greedy corporate/financial types who packaged up these mortages and sold them, then ran crying to the government for bailouts while writing themselves checks for fat bonuses (for cleverness?)
It was Congress (both parties) voting for irresponsible $pending, and for wars we didn't need to be in.
It was Congress (both parties) who can't get off the drug called earmarks. They know what they propose wouldn't pass a straight up and down vote so they slip it into another bill that has a better chance of passing.
It was a president elected only on the basis of his ability to charm a crowd while his followers shout down anyone who dares ask questions about his ability to lead or his real-world experience.
It was this president saying we must have a huge stimulus and the lemming-like rush of congressional leadership to pass ill-conceived legislation taking money from the citizens to chew up in the government dungeons and parcel back out to their friends. We will be a long time getting over this mess. No one in the presidential or congressional branches has a clue if any of this will work. They are only trying to make themselves look good.
Now the threat of higher taxes is causing millions of jobs to disappear, along with market value and millions of retirement accounts.
How is socialism going to fix this? More spending and taxes. Good luck with that. "
PlasticPinkFlamingo wrote on Mar 6, 2009 6:07 PM:
Specifically, where is the benefit? The only benefit is to government bureaucracy and executives who want bigger golden parachutes, and to those in Congress who gain power by having all this money under their control. The people on Main Street will get . . . higher taxes while they lose their jobs. I guess if you're not working at least you won't have to worry about paying those higher taxes. And those of you who chant that the tax increases are only on the rich and the corporations - Wake Up! It won't work like you think it will. Sounds great to tax the rich, and if it worked I would be right up there with you clamoring for it. But rich people pay my salary (for me, quite literally). If they pull back and don't pay me, then I will become a tax burden rather than a tax payer.
Even the apologists admit that we certainly won't get 3 or 4 or 5 million new jobs. Even the government budget office doesn't think that the stimulus will do any good at all.
Every day I read about more calls for government programs to do everything for us so we won't even have to blow our noses when we get the sniffles.
So what happens when taxes get to be more than 100% of the GDP? "
Madison Jay Hamilton wrote on Mar 6, 2009 6:43 PM:
Public investment in infrastructure helps spur private enterprise. Silicon Valley boomed because of prior public investment in universities and defense industries. Roads, bridges, canals, schools and a regulated economy help private businesses. "
PlasticPinkFlamingo wrote on Mar 6, 2009 9:50 PM:
Notice the word "necessary" - we don't need the pork barrel kind of ego-driven pet project construction.
We also have a problem with specific taxes collected for things like road maintenance, which are then used for other purposes - then we get the calls for increased taxes. No, we don't want increased taxes. We want our road fund taxes used for road repairs, not other government silliness. "
dellasumbrella wrote on Mar 6, 2009 10:18 PM:
So thank you reminding us of the possibilities. "
Madison Jay Hamilton wrote on Mar 6, 2009 10:20 PM:
Raven wrote on Mar 7, 2009 9:32 AM:
glenroy wrote on Mar 9, 2009 3:47 PM:
Additionally, there were thousands of Americans who enlisted in foreign services….
This is pretty basic stuff….not surprising too complicated for some.... "
anticommie wrote on Mar 12, 2009 11:47 PM:
Norman Thomas was right this country will adapt socialist principals once the word "socialism" is replaced by "liberalism." And a majority of voters fell for it, if not full out embraced it. "
jwk wrote on Mar 15, 2009 4:36 AM:
JimClark wrote on Mar 16, 2009 3:05 PM: