I think people during the Great Depression had it better than us.

[Toastedturningtidelegs]

  I love how people who were not alive during the Depression can make a statement such as this!

Breeze54  (1000+ posts)        Wed Nov-19-08 11:14 PM
Original message
I think people during the Great Depression had it better than us.
 They didn't have TV and have to hear, if you turn it on, the repeating of the same scary phrases...

Economic melt down

Economic freeze

Credit crunch/freeze

Massive lay offs

Homelessness rising

Bailouts for the rich, none for those struggling

The new poor

Foreclosure's running rampant

Financial crisis

Dismal holiday season

etc., etc., etc.

~~~~~


Feel free to add any you may have heard.





 

Would love for a person who actually lived through the Depression actually smack some sense into this idiot! http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4497414&mesg_id=4497414

[Toastedturningtidelegs]

 

halo experiment (475 posts)      Wed Nov-19-08 11:16 PM
Response to Original message
2. No offense, but you should revisit that era
 before you talk about how good they had it. Thousands waiting in soup lines is not preferable to having a TV tuned to a news channel, nor is sleeping on a dirt floor.
"There's something deeply wrong with putting the rights of a minority up to a majority vote," -Evan Wolfson

The pothead primitive shoots back!

Breeze54  (1000+ posts)        Wed Nov-19-08 11:19 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Wow! Do you not understand the difference between mass media then and now?!
 Many back then didn't even have radio's or cars with radio's.

I don't need to 'go back there'. I heard all about it from my parents.




 Got any weed? TELL YOUR REP TO SAY NO TO OFFSHORE DRILLING AND YES TO ENERGY 

You must have been high or you weren't listening then dummie!

[Splashdown]

And these people vote!


 

[Carl]

People of every political persuasion were willing to work and work damn hard for their food and clothes.
They would take any job they could find.
Little did they realize the government created ones would someday lead to their grandchildren being useless DUmmies unwilling to do anything but bitch.

[JohnnyReb]

People of every political persuasion were willing to work and work damn hard for their food and clothes.
They would take any job they could find.
Little did they realize the government created ones would someday lead to their grandchildren being useless DUmmies unwilling to do anything but bitch.

TRUE!

[USA4ME]

Breeze54

I think....

That's all you need to read to know the rest of the post is a bunch of crap.

.

[Splashdown]

That's all you need to read to know the rest of the post is a bunch of crap.

.

That earned a Hi-5!

[Traveshamockery]

The more posts I read from these people, the more I see that their brains have been absolutely fried by liberalism, or they never had a brain to begin with.  Talk about a stream of semi-consciousness. 

[jukin]

A liberal education in practice.

[Chris_]

I think people during the Great Depression had it better than us.

Yes, they were.  Most of the people who lived through the Great Depression had a work ethic instilled in them from early childhood.  Many of them had worked in farm fields from the time they were old enough to walk.  Even the city shits who thought the world owed them a living, and waited for dear old unca Franklin's gub'mint to wipe their asses, feed them, and clothe them were exceptionally rare.

By the way DUmbasses, you are aware that while the Stock Market crash occured during Herbert Hoover's administration in 1929, but the Great Depression didn't kick off until after uncle Franklin tried "fixing" the economy - in 1933 - aren't you?

[Zeus]

“One day, the father of a very wealthy family took his son on a trip to the country with the express purpose of showing him how poor people live.

They spent a couple of days and nights on the farm of what would be considered a very poor family.

On their return from their trip, the father asked his son, ‘How was the trip?’

’It was great, Dad.’

‘Did you see how poor people live,’ the father asked.

‘Oh yeah,’ said the son.

‘So, tell me, what did you learn from the trip,’ asked the father.

The son answered:
‘I saw that we have one dog and they had four.’

‘We have a pool that reaches to the middle of our garden and they have a creek that has no end.’

’We have imported lanterns in our garden and they have the stars at night.’

‘Our patio reaches to the front yard and they have the whole horizon.’

‘We have a small piece of land to live on and they have fields that go beyond our sight.’

‘We have servants who serve us, but they serve others.’

‘We buy our food, but they grow theirs.’

‘We have walls around our property to protect us, they have friends to protect them.’

The boy’s father was speechless.

Then his son added, ‘Thanks Dad for showing me how poor we are.

[Happy Fun Ball]

So, what she's saying is that four years of Obama would be worse for the US than the Great Depression?

She might be on to something here...

[Chris_]

So, what she's saying is that four years of Obama would be worse for the US than the Great Depression?

She might be on to something here...

Blind squirrel. Nut.

[jtyangel]

Yes, they were.  Most of the people who lived through the Great Depression had a work ethic instilled in them from early childhood.  Many of them had worked in farm fields from the time they were old enough to walk.  Even the city shits who thought the world owed them a living, and waited for dear old unca Franklin's gub'mint to wipe their asses, feed them, and clothe them were exceptionally rare.

By the way DUmbasses, you are aware that while the Stock Market crash occured during Herbert Hoover's administration in 1929, but the Great Depression didn't kick off until after uncle Franklin tried "fixing" the economy - in 1933 - aren't you?

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Men stood for hours in line to WORK! People were not working because there was no work to be had, but they still were able to move themselves, create for themselves makeshift provisions, find creative ways to provide for their families, etc. Families then were hurt not only by economic woes, but a drought that decimated a still very agricultural way of life in some areas.

Things were also exacerbated for many families by the fact that women often still did not work and if they did it was for menial wages. People over in DUmmieland forget that most families--well intact ones--have two people capable of earning a wage. Back then, the man would bring the bulk of the earnings in, even if the wife was willing to or did work out of the home. These families didn't bitch and moan about working 12 hours a day either to then have to tend to several children and chores at 'home'. They knew life could be totally unfair at times.

 I really don't want to see us be in a position for people ot have to learn that painful lesson and I actually doubt unless something radical in the way of top leadership behavior happens, a 'depression' here, won't look like it did then. It might mean people will have to lose the cell phones, game systems, and newer tvs and vehicles though and moderate their travel behavior even locally. It may mean people will have to work two jobs for a while. I hope I'm not proven wrong, but I really don't envision hunger on the scale it was in the depression, nor homelessness. I would like to think some families would be willing to band together in one home if it meant keeping a roof over their heads. For example, my mother lives with us now. I'd gladly take in my brother and a couple other families if it got bad, if it meant I could keep my house and keep us all under a roof and with foods in our bellies. I thought DUmmies liked communal ways of life? That's what it might take if it ever did get really bad is to return to that--btw, that would mean quite a few conservatives shaking the die hard individualist way of thinking too if it meant survival. There is a bit of a stubborness sometimes on all sides. 

[Chris_]

I'd gladly take in my brother and a couple other families if it got bad, if it meant I could keep my house and keep us all under a roof and with foods in our bellies. I thought DUmmies liked communal ways of life? That's what it might take if it ever did get really bad is to return to that--btw, that would mean quite a few conservatives shaking the die hard individualist way of thinking too if it meant survival. There is a bit of a stubborness sometimes on all sides. 

I've mentioned before that I don't expect my current client (Northrop/Grumman and the US Air Force) to have work for me more than a year into the forthcoming depression the Democrats in the Federal Gub'mint are going to spend us into (though every day that I have a job after that year, I will be on my knees each morning thanking God that I DO have a job to go to). 

When that fades away, I'm making final preparations now to adjust my skills set to the market that I live in.  I'm adding a milling machine and MIG welding rig and stocking up on metals so that I can go from being just a designer of mechanical components to a FABRICATOR of mechanical parts - such as those suitable to keep the equipment on the farms and ranches around here up and running.  That way, we are able to have something tangible to trade for something tangible in order to keep our "local" economy moving.  By the end of next year, I expect that I'll have added enough solar and wind generation capability to my home, that I could keep it running even if the grid went away.  And my wife and I are already talking about how we could take 2 of our siblings' families in with us if the shit hit the fan - with some re-allignment of sleeping arrangements, but do-able.

It's not communal living though.  And I'd wager a Thanksgiving feast on the abilities of a group of "rugged individualists" being better able to survive - and thrive - a Depression than a hippy-dippy commune steeped to the gills in socialism, equality, and "social justice".

[Splashdown]

Gotta remember, the other half of that Great Depression was the Dust Bowl that hit at the same time. Not only were people unemployed, there also was not as much food going around. That was an ecological disaster of pretty much unprecedented proportions. The Great Depression was, in many ways, a perfect storm of disasters.

[jtyangel]

I've mentioned before that I don't expect my current client (Northrop/Grumman and the US Air Force) to have work for me more than a year into the forthcoming depression the Democrats in the Federal Gub'mint are going to spend us into (though every day that I have a job after that year, I will be on my knees each morning thanking God that I DO have a job to go to). 

When that fades away, I'm making final preparations now to adjust my skills set to the market that I live in.  I'm adding a milling machine and MIG welding rig and stocking up on metals so that I can go from being just a designer of mechanical components to a FABRICATOR of mechanical parts - such as those suitable to keep the equipment on the farms and ranches around here up and running.  That way, we are able to have something tangible to trade for something tangible in order to keep our "local" economy moving.  By the end of next year, I expect that I'll have added enough solar and wind generation capability to my home, that I could keep it running even if the grid went away.  And my wife and I are already talking about how we could take 2 of our siblings' families in with us if the shit hit the fan - with some re-allignment of sleeping arrangements, but do-able.

It's not communal living though.  And I'd wager a Thanksgiving feast on the abilities of a group of "rugged individualists" being better able to survive - and thrive - a Depression than a hippy-dippy commune steeped to the gills in socialism, equality, and "social justice".

I think you have to detach yourself from the idea of communal living in any hippy sense of the word. As much as you may hate the word, when you pool resources together voluntarily and choose to live together with other people for your mutual benefit, it is indeed communal living. You do it though to different ends. Communal living in troubled times is in the interest of living more efficiently and pooling together the strengths of the individuals that make up the group and it is done VOLUNTARILY. Communal living done for some creepy ideal is something entirely different. Plus, the idea of commnal lving in troubled times and with responsible individuals is the idea that EVERYONE will contribute. A hippy commune will generally let layabouts remain layabouts. They are two entirely different things, however what both sides have to understand is this:

For 'our side', communal living--voluntarily--could be necessary in troubled times and pooling resources could be required to make it through. it doesn't mean you are a hippy or weak..it means you and other like-minded individuals do what you have to to survive. It may mean being strong enough to realize you can do more with 'economies of scale' even in your own home.

For their side, that surviving  will mean work and they will have to cut the driftwood even if that driftwood spins a good TiT yarn. It's not going to be some free love, guitar twanging holiday on a farm. And living with others will mean having to live with people you don't always agree with or who approve of what you do personally. That one I think would be really tough for some of the dummies, along with the idea of working hard.

[franksolich]

Well, jtyangel, we always have that sordid example of communalism, that thing Bronson Alcott tried in Massachusetts circa 160 years ago.

Alcott was an "intellectual," too good to do real work.  And he inevitably attracted all these other "intellectuals" to the farm.

They all sat around and "intellectualized" while the farm went to Hell.

Alcott's wife and daughters almost starved to death, and everyone would've starved to death, if Alcott's wife and daughters hadn't done all the back-breaking labor to keep them alive.

I have yet to see someone offer, "Hey, let's start a commune, and I'll do the manual work."

It's always, "Hey, let's start a commune, and we all can sit around 'intellectualizing' all day long."

[jtyangel]

I think perhaps we have different ideas of communal living. What you described, frank, is an example of a commune based on ideals and that type inevitably fails for the very reason you stated. I'm talking of the type of thing that happens in families who pull resources together out of necessity--you know the type where granny and a couple generations lived in the same house--trust me when I say my German great grandmother wouldn't have let anyone live in her home unless they were contributing something of value. I could see a less burdened welfare situation if more families could figure something like this out and I suspect many do(but still collect the welfare bennies). You'd have family that would give a roof over the head in return for work. Usually there is an unwillingness on one or both of those issues. Often times the isolationist doesn't want anyone to 'infringe' on his way of life and the person who could use the roof over their head does not want to do anything of value to have that roof over their head.

I apologize if I had not made myself clear on what I was speaking of. Perhaps there is a more appropriate term then communal living?

[franksolich]

No, jtyangel, madam; you made yourself perfectly clear about what sort of communalism to which you were referring.

I just got side-tracked; the deal is, whenever anyone mentions "commune," the mind automatically strays to Bronson Alcott and his disastrous idea which cost others (but not he himself) much.

[DumbAss Tanker]

By the way DUmbasses, you are aware that while the Stock Market crash occured during Herbert Hoover's administration in 1929, but the Great Depression didn't kick off until after uncle Franklin tried "fixing" the economy - in 1933 - aren't you?

And yet, it all ended up sticking to Hoover, not FDR.  Probably what the Obamites are counting on, but as even the DUmmies noted, it's not the same information environment now.

[Peter3_1]

My father was a child during the depreession. The only "real" money being made here was rum running. Simply, only the criminal class had a living income. Dad would watch the Cadillac and  Lincoln 12 cyl. "tanker" sedans driving down MainSt. headed for NYC as soon as the sun set.

Otherwise, you lived off the land and Bays, shooting your own Ducks, catching yiour own fish for protine.Bartering for vegetables or farming. Everyone had a "root cellar". MY G. Father operated SIX businesses at the same time to make a living. A lumber and Coal bus, an insurance bus, a small bank, the electric company , the water company and a small drygoods & pharmacy. STILL he had to do some small farming , including a small vineyard, to suppliment income, and HE was considered RICH!

Cheap as gasoline was, a couple of "old timers" modified their Model A SO ONCE AT SPEED, AND HOT, THEY SWITCHED FROM gASOLINE TO kERO. TO SAVE MONEY.

tHE AREA WAS NOT BROUGHT OUT OF the depression by anything FDR did, but by smuggling and the VERY rich dec iding to live here. Juan Tripp, "Black Jack" Bouvier (Jackie's Dad), a few shipping magnates (MO NAMNES THERE, THE FAMILY IS STILL HERE), John Drew, Howard Hughs, and hangers on.

By WW2 the NATIONAL unemployment had dropped fron 25% to a mere `14%, and the market did not fully recover until 1954.   And, BTW, the 1987 recession was "worse" than today as far as realestate is concerned. People WALKED AWAY from 5000 sq ft NEW homes, just walked away.....