• Comment (44)

Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul Flub America’s Post-WWII Economic History

January 20, 2012 RSS Feed Print

There was a revealing moment in Thursday night's GOP debate in Charleston, S.C.

Rep. Ron Paul dilated on the problems of reintegrating veterans into a postwar economy:

[W]e have to think about how serious our problems are here, because we faced something much, much greater after World War II. We had 10 million came home, all at once. [W]hat did we do then? There were some of the liberals back then that said: Oh, we have to have more work programs, and do this and that. And they thought they would have to, you know, do everything conceivable for those 10 million. They never got around to it, because they came home so quickly.

But you know what the government did? They cut the budget by 60 percent.  They cut taxes by 30 percent. By that time, the debt had been liquidated, and everybody went back to work again and you didn't need any special programs.

[See a collection of political cartoons on the 2012 GOP hopefuls.]

Tax cuts and budget cuts. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Former Sen. Rick Santorum and former Gov. Mitt Romney followed Paul. Santorum took an appalling cheap shot when he claimed that President Obama wants to cut benefits for veterans. Romney offered up federalist platitudes about helping veterans more effectively at the state level.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, as is his wont, piped up to correct "Congressman Paul's history":

The U.S. government did two dramatic things after World War II. They created a G.I. Bill which enabled literally millions of returning veterans to go to college for the very first time... The second thing they did is, they dramatically cut taxes, and the economy took off and grew dramatically, and it absorbed the workforce.

[Read the U.S. News debate: Do the Rich Pay Their Fair Share in Taxes? ]

While he was the only candidate to recall the G.I. Bill, Gingrich was only marginally better informed than his rivals as he quickly fell back on recitations of the supply-side catechism.

These guys didn't just miss the forest for the trees; they missed the forest for a twig.

Gingrich could have gone on to mention the Marshall Plan and the massive postwar recovery effort, which helped rebuild a European market that could afford to buy U.S. goods. He could have mentioned the system of international trade and monetary exchange that knitted together developed noncommunist economies.

[Check out our collection of political cartoons on defense spending.]

Why did the postwar U.S. economy take off so "dramatically," to borrow one of Gingrich's favorite adverbs?

Could it have had something to do with the war effort itself? You know, the Metals Reserve Company, the Rubber Reserve Company, the Defense Plant Corporation, the Defense Supplies Corporation, etc.?

There were prodigious increases in steel production and merchant marine tonnage. There was rapid technological innovation in aeronautics that sparked the jet airplane industry, not to mention research and development of pharmaceuticals. This isn't to say that it wasn't a good thing for a free society that this juggernaut was eventually wound down. It's merely to say that the groundwork for unprecedented prosperity was laid well before any changes were made to the federal budget.

[Read the U.S. News debate: Does the United States Need a Balanced Budget Amendment? ]

Clyde Prestowitz sums up the American position as an industrial hegemon immediately following the conclusion of the war:

It accounted for about half of global GDP, owned 70 percent of the world's gold, had a monopoly on nuclear power, was the world leader in virtually every technology and every industry, owned the world's main currency, was the leading creditor to the tune of $3 billion, and had a trade or current account surplus of $5.8 billion. It had more than caught up. It was all alone in a realm no nation had ever before inhabited.

But no; it all comes down to fiscal policy, taxes and spending. It's like some kind of ritual incantation: Government can't create wealth ... Government can't create wealth ... According to this line of ahistorical supply-side reasoning, 1945 was Year Zero. Taxes were cut. Price controls were lifted. And the economy just magically took off. It's ersatz religion, only worse: It's a religion that's just a creed atop a mountain of ignorance.

It's comical until you realize one of these jokers might be president.

Tags:
Rick Santorum,
economy,
Ron Paul,
2012 presidential election,
Newt Gingrich,
politics,
Mitt Romney

Reader Comments Read all comments (44)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

The author of this bit commits the fallacy of the seen vs the unseen.

When a shop keeper's window is broken, is it good for the ecomony? You say yes and point to the work that is created for the window maker. But what you fail to see is what the shop keeper would have spent his money on had he not needed to buy a window.

If the US Government hadn't spent all that money on war, they would have either left the money to the people to spend, or they would have spent in on something else.

War does not stimulate the economy. It only saps life and wealth from the people while a few in the arms manufacturing business get rich.

Ron Smith of ID 3:28PM March 13, 2012

l3lessed of CA _ You listen to liberals too much. Listen to John F. Kennedy. You wrote:

1. “It started with unneeded and unfunded tax breaks to start the process of slowly strangling the government to death. ”

JKF wrote:

A. “Our true choice is not between tax reduction, on the one hand, and the avoidance of large Federal deficits on the other. It is increasingly clear that no matter what party is in power, so long as our national security needs keep rising, an economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenues to balance our budget just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits… In short, it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now.”

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2003/08/the-historical-lessons-of-lower-tax-rates

B. “According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the Bush tax cuts actually shifted the total tax burden farther toward the rich so that in 2000-2004, total income tax paid by the top 40% of income-earners grew by 4.6% to 99.1% of the total”

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/03/lying_about_bushs_tax_cuts.html

2. “the Bush administration, who racked up a massive debt the current administration inherited”

A. obuma racked up more debt in 3 years than Bush in 8 years.

B. No mention , by you, of recession. Bush mentioned. Many times. Trying to stop Bill C.’s recession. That Lawyer obuma & Acorn was involved in as well:

“Pelosi Caught In Major Lie- Says Bush Didn't Warn Congress About Financial Crisis…

Records Show He Warned Congress 17 Times in 2008 Alone”

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2010/05/pelosi-caught-in-major-lie-says-bush-didnt-warn-congress-about-financial-crisis-records-show-he-warned-congress-17-in-2008-alone/

3. “At the same time, they have done everything in their power to obstruct any legislation that might strengthen the governments power to insure its citizens get a fair shot at a prosperous future”

Is is 30 + bills passed by us and Senate sits on ? Refusing even to re-write them and send back to House.

4. “It is no coincidence while destroying the governments ability to function, they began to label themselves as either anti-governmentt or completely anti-government”

Never heard “ anti-government”. In 90‘s Newt with CONTRACT WITH AMERICA we called for “ small government”.

5. “I would love to vote republican”

I DOUBT IT...

Bill Hedges of MO 4:41AM January 22, 2012

The Right wing, over the last twenty years, has done an amazing job of insuring the government won't and can't work. It started with unneeded and unfunded tax breaks to start the process of slowly strangling the government to death. It was only accelerated under the Bush administration, who racked up a massive debt the current administration inherited. At the same time, they have done everything in their power to obstruct any legislation that might strengthen the governments power to insure its citizens get a fair shot at a prosperous future.

It is no coincidence while destroying the governments ability to function, they began to label themselves as either small government or completely anti-government. They have created many of the current problems while insuring they label themselves as the solution. Government is evil and we're the only ones willing to take it down is their current mantra. However, they don't inform the public how many of the problems they caused.

It is actually a rather genius long term political game. It is just like the hackers who create viruses than force users to buy the software to remove the viruses they created. It's beneficial to the party doing it, while it destroys every one else.

I would love to vote republican, but the current extreme stance of the right wing scares the crap out of me. And any one who is a moderate is instantly labeled an extreme socialist, communist, or leftist and promptly crucified as an example to those who might deviate from the party line.

l3lessed of CA 8:17PM January 21, 2012

Scott Galupo

Scott Galupo

Scott Galupo is a Washington-based freelance writer. He formerly worked for House Republican Leader John Boehner, and was a staff writer for The Washington Times.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

An End to the NRA’s Angry Swagger

Polls show that overwhelming majorities of Americans, and even of NRA members, favor universal background checks.

Mary Kate Cary

Washington’s Toxic Stew

President Obama's burgeoning problems affect more than this week’s three scandals.

Latest Videos

advertisement