Worst Economic President in US history

[Coburn In 2012]

Obama by far but FDR would be even with him if he didnt have the war saving American business.

[Ban my account ffs!]

OH, I don't know.. I think it's a tough choice between George W. Bush, George H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Gerald Ford, Richard Nixon, and Dwight Eisenhower.

Oh, and I'm not a blithering hack or anything.

[Vepres]

Democrat: FDR, arguably prolonged the depression
Republican: Hoover (in principle I like his policies, but he didn't do anything to combat the depression)

[Mint]

Democrat: FDR, arguably prolonged the depression
Republican: Hoover (in principle I like his policies, but he didn't do anything to combat the depression)

Yes he did, that's the problem. If you look at his economic policies he engaged in protectionism, tax hikes, and government aid to businesses (but not really individuals). Does any of this sound familiar?

[phk]

Democrat: FDR, arguably prolonged the depression
Republican: Hoover (in principle I like his policies, but he didn't do anything to combat the depression)

Yes he did, that's the problem. If you look at his economic policies he engaged in protectionism, tax hikes, and government aid to businesses (but not really individuals). Does any of this sound familiar?

[Mechaman]

Democrat: FDR, arguably prolonged the depression
Republican: Hoover (in principle I like his policies, but he didn't do anything to combat the depression)

Vepres, you disappoint me.
My ass Hoover didn't do anything. In fact FDR has admitted a good number of times that the New Deal was based off of ideas of Hoover. The idea that Hoover sat on his ass and said "let it be" is total bullshit, it really is.
Here's what Hoover did in his short time in office in response to the Great Depression:
The Mexican Repatriation: A forced migration of 500,000 Mexicans and Mexican Americans to Mexico to remove people seen as "usurpers" of American jobs.
Signed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 (What I call the "Mega Dumbass Muricah Only Act of 1930") which increased tariffs on thousands of imported items and since the whole world was suffering, other countries tariffed the hell out of US imports into their countries in retaliation, reducing international trade and worsening the Great Depression.
More than doubled the income tax rate on the top income bracket.
Don't even get me started on his legislative agenda.
Hoover was anything but laissez faire. The above I mentioned are just a taste, a friggin taste, of what he did in office.
(facepalm)

[Marokai Backbeat]

Democrat: FDR, arguably prolonged the depression

This is complete theory. You're arguing that we should've engaged in different policies more than 60 years ago because they would've, again in theory, been more effective than programs that were effective in the first place. Anyone who says FDR prolonged the depression is mostly arguing out their ass.

(There is of course some merit in saying that the depression was lengthened because of the 1937 Recession, but this is because FDR caved to years of criticism and started to cut spending in the New Deal. After the cut, the economy tanked again, falling back to terrible levels. Thankfully, this recession did not last a great deal and is generally hyped to be more than it was, but it probably extended things by a couple years.)

[Marokai Backbeat]

Oh and as for the question: Herbert Hoover, George W. Bush, and Reagan. Carter was also rather mediocre, but is unfairly criticized.

[War on Want]

Oh and as for the question: Herbert Hoover, George W. Bush, and Reagan. Carter was also rather mediocre, but is unfairly criticized.

We think too much alike. There were definitley worse economic presidents than Carter though.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Oh and as for the question: Herbert Hoover, George W. Bush, and Reagan. Carter was also rather mediocre, but is unfairly criticized.

We think too much alike. There were definitley worse economic presidents than Carter though.

Had to throw in a Democrat somewhere to be fair.

[Beet]

Democrat: FDR, arguably prolonged the depression
Republican: Hoover (in principle I like his policies, but he didn't do anything to combat the depression)

Yes he did, that's the problem. If you look at his economic policies he engaged in protectionism, tax hikes, and government aid to businesses (but not really individuals). Does any of this sound familiar?

The tax hikes and government aid to business did not really come until 1932, much closer to the bottom than the top. It is well worth nothing that the 90% top income tax bracket remained in place from 1932 until 1964, so it certainly did not prevent recovery from the Depression, nor did it cause the Depression. There are also scholarly reassessments of how much Smoot-Hawley actually contributed to the Depression.

In 1929 Hoover was still engaging in voluntarism and rejecting unemployment relief. He did support some infrastructure projects, but those were swamped, just as the current stimulus is being swamped.

His most significant mistake though was adhering for too long to the gold standard.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Andrew Jackson with his ill-considered Bank War clearly needs to be listed among the contenders, and would get my vote for worst.  Granted the chickens he raised did not come home to roost until Van Buren was President, but no other President has ever sought on purpose to destroy a major pillar of our economic system for purely political reasons.

[Lief 🗽]

Ernest and Marokai both make good points. I would add most of the Gilded Age presidents as well.

[Mint]

The tax hikes and government aid to business did not really come until 1932, much closer to the bottom than the top. It is well worth nothing that the 90% top income tax bracket remained in place from 1932 until 1964, so it certainly did not prevent recovery from the Depression, nor did it cause the Depression. There are also scholarly reassessments of how much Smoot-Hawley actually contributed to the Depression.

It came towards the end of his presidency, but I'm not just referring to the top rate (although I personally have no doubts that does in inhibit productivity). Aside from raising the top rate from 25% to 63% he also reduced personal exemptions, increased corporate taxation, AND added a check tax. There is considerable evidence that the money contractions of the early 30s were exacerbated by the latter policy alone.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hoover's Emergency Committee on Employment (PECE) mobilized charity and encouraged local government to implement public works. While the federal government did not directly fund programs, the states did. The New Deal just went further on this by involving the Feds in the process under the assumption that it was a more effective use of resources. I'm not sure I would call that 'swamped.' Poorly implemented, perhaps.

As for unemployment: Yes, and he also attempted to bail out the banks under the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. Which just re-affirms what I said earlier.

[DownWithTheLeft]

FDR no doubt

[Associate Justice PiT]

     FDR, but LBJ was also trash. Clinton doesn't really deserve to be mentioned here since despite his refusal to gut entitlement programs, he did manage to balance the budget.

[Sewer]

Bush

[opebo]

Out of those listed, obviously Clinton.  But seriously all those listed are far above average.

[Frodo]

Herbert Hoover -Gold
George W. Bush -Silver
Jimmy Carter -Bronze

[Beet]

The tax hikes and government aid to business did not really come until 1932, much closer to the bottom than the top. It is well worth nothing that the 90% top income tax bracket remained in place from 1932 until 1964, so it certainly did not prevent recovery from the Depression, nor did it cause the Depression. There are also scholarly reassessments of how much Smoot-Hawley actually contributed to the Depression.

It came towards the end of his presidency, but I'm not just referring to the top rate (although I personally have no doubts that does in inhibit productivity). Aside from raising the top rate from 25% to 63% he also reduced personal exemptions, increased corporate taxation, AND added a check tax. There is considerable evidence that the money contractions of the early 30s were exacerbated by the latter policy alone.

Not only does this fail to address the issue of my post, but every tax you speak of further reinforces my point. The more Hoover raised taxes in 1932 under the Revenue Act of 1932 (under which all of your taxes, and more, fall under) passed that June, the more evidence there is that tax hikes did not prevent the recovery in the stock market which began that July or the recovery in the economy which began the following March. FDR again raised taxes in 1934, 1935 and 1936. Compared to June 1932, taxes in 1936 were astronomically high and would remain so for decades. During this time the Dow rallied over 300%.

The the study you linked on the money supply is rather beside the point. After being on the downtrend for years, the money supply was on a clear uptrend from 1932 to 1934, as was the national economy. So even if some marginal connection between the check tax and a reduced multiplier can be found, it was not remotely central to the causes of the Depression, and it did not prevent a strong recovery.

Reagan hiked taxes throughout the mid-1980s, a time of great expansion. Of the Clinton tax hike of 1993, Dick Armey said "Clearly, this is a job-killer in the short-run. The impact on job creation is going to be devastating." Newt Gingrich opined that "The tax increase will... lead to a recession... and will actually increase the deficit."

And we are entering a depression right now with no tax hike in sight (nor indeed any major tax hikes of any kind, except on cigarettes, since 1993)- and Obama has committed to cutting taxes, just as was Hoover's instinct in 1929. If there is a comparison, it is in that. The idea that tax hikes are always bad economic policy just flies in the face of the accumulated facts.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A.k.a. he engaged in voluntarism.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hoover's voluntarism and his few infrastructure projects were swamped. To his credit, the size of the federal government was so small at that time and he didn't have enough time to expand it properly. The New Deal had more of an effect, but it was preceded by a dollar devaluation and shuttering the banks, remember.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which did not come until mid-1932, again.

Edit: Also, nearly all of the loans made by the RFC were repaid, although this is probably partially a result of the program's timing. But it is worth nothing that the RFC's most active years were 1933 and 1934, just as things were turning around.

Debating conservatives on the Great Depression is exasperating. They feel so strongly about a historical matter in which the empirical evidence, as far as any historical economic story goes, is about as one-sided as it can possibly be against them. But they have so many sources and theories to try and explain it the other way. It's almost amusing. You never hear liberals trying to argue that Volcker's policies prolonged inflation. We know when we're beat.

[JSojourner]

George W. Bush

But a good argument could be made for the Harding-Coolidge-Hoover trinity.

[Marokai Backbeat]

The tax hikes and government aid to business did not really come until 1932, much closer to the bottom than the top. It is well worth nothing that the 90% top income tax bracket remained in place from 1932 until 1964, so it certainly did not prevent recovery from the Depression, nor did it cause the Depression. There are also scholarly reassessments of how much Smoot-Hawley actually contributed to the Depression.

It came towards the end of his presidency, but I'm not just referring to the top rate (although I personally have no doubts that does in inhibit productivity). Aside from raising the top rate from 25% to 63% he also reduced personal exemptions, increased corporate taxation, AND added a check tax. There is considerable evidence that the money contractions of the early 30s were exacerbated by the latter policy alone.

Not only does this fail to address the issue of my post, but every tax you speak of further reinforces my point. The more Hoover raised taxes in 1932 under the Revenue Act of 1932 (under which all of your taxes, and more, fall under) passed that June, the more evidence there is that tax hikes did not prevent the recovery in the stock market which began that July or the recovery in the economy which began the following March. FDR again raised taxes in 1934, 1935 and 1936. Compared to June 1932, taxes in 1936 were astronomically high and would remain so for decades. During this time the Dow rallied over 300%.

The the study you linked on the money supply is rather beside the point. After being on the downtrend for years, the money supply was on a clear uptrend from 1932 to 1934, as was the national economy. So even if some marginal connection between the check tax and a reduced multiplier can be found, it was not remotely central to the causes of the Depression, and it did not prevent a strong recovery.

Reagan hiked taxes throughout the mid-1980s, a time of great expansion. Of the Clinton tax hike of 1993, Dick Armey said "Clearly, this is a job-killer in the short-run. The impact on job creation is going to be devastating." Newt Gingrich opined that "The tax increase will... lead to a recession... and will actually increase the deficit."

And we are entering a depression right now with no tax hike in sight (nor indeed any major tax hikes of any kind, except on cigarettes, since 1993)- and Obama has committed to cutting taxes, just as was Hoover's instinct in 1929. If there is a comparison, it is in that. The idea that tax hikes are always bad economic policy just flies in the face of the accumulated facts.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A.k.a. he engaged in voluntarism.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hoover's voluntarism and his few infrastructure projects were swamped. To his credit, the size of the federal government was so small at that time and he didn't have enough time to expand it properly. The New Deal had more of an effect, but it was preceded by a dollar devaluation and shuttering the banks, remember.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which did not come until mid-1932, again.

Edit: Also, nearly all of the loans made by the RFC were repaid, although this is probably partially a result of the program's timing. But it is worth nothing that the RFC's most active years were 1933 and 1934, just as things were turning around.

Debating conservatives on the Great Depression is exasperating. They feel so strongly about a historical matter in which the empirical evidence, as far as any historical economic story goes, is about as one-sided as it can possibly be against them. But they have so many sources and theories to try and explain it the other way. It's almost amusing. You never hear liberals trying to argue that Volcker's policies prolonged inflation. We know when we're beat.

*cough*

[Magic 8-Ball]

Andrew Jackson.  As was stated before, you can't cut the economy off at its knees and expect things to run smoothly.

[Democratic Hawk]

NOTA

[Democratic Hawk]

George W. Bush

In terms of the starting point, George W Bush was bequeathed a robust economy that had generated 23 million new jobs in addition to a federal government living well within its means and running at a surplus; and the end point, a shattered economy haemorrhaging jobs at a pace not seen since the recession of the early 1980s and that after $1.8 trillion in tax cuts , Bush surely ranks up there with the worst of them

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yep