There are four possible answers:
*The reduction of the national debt
*Control of stock prices by the Federal Government
*Joint effort of business and labor to strengthen the Presidency
*Assumption by the Federal Government of greater responsibility for the nation's well-being
CorrectionsI allowed the above answers -- generally incorrect though they are -- to remain because they represent some distressingly common misconceptions about the New Deal. Here are some better answers...
"The reduction of the national debt." Hogwash. When Franklin Roosevelt took office in 1933, the debt as a percentage of GDP was at around 33%. Within a year, the New Deal had driven it to 41% of GDP, and it remained there until WW2.
"Control of stock prices by the Federal Government." Nothing in the New Deal controlled stock prices. By the time FDR took office in 1933, the Stock Market had largely recovered from its 1929 catastrophe. The New Deal was aimed more at relieving unemployment and providing relief for the poor and aged.
"Joint effort of business and labor to strengthen the Presidency." More hogwash. The New Deal was an effort by the President of the United States and his administration to dramatically strengthen the presidency. FDR was a disciple of Wilson, a "progressive" who believed that a powerful executive branch -- made up of wise administrators -- should govern the unwashed masses. In many instances, FDR was successful in beefing up the power of the Executive Branch, and that is without question his single most significant legacy.
"Assumption by the Federal Government of greater responsibility for the nation's well-being." Stated another way, we're talking about the assumption by the national (not federal) government of tremendous powers over the nation's well-being, powers that can be -- and often are -- used to the detriment of the nation's citizens, and to the benefit of the national government itself. This aspect of the New Deal legacy goes back to the previous point.
Correction of Corrections
Although that could be considered a correct answer, it isn't.
1.FDR turned to Deficit spending under the pressure of many politicians although he despised the idea.
2.When talking about stock prices, there is no real explanation of what the US government did. The SEC, created in 1934, continues to monitor the stock market and enforce laws regarding the sale of stocks and bonds. The FDIC, created in 1933 by the Glass-Steagall Act, shored up the banking system by reassuring individual depositors that their savings are protected against loss.
3.The third point of the original answer is not true at all. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) was established to take care of the relations between laborers and big business.
4.Now, although the government did have some control over the nation's well-being, it did not assume full responsibility. The TVA (Tennessee Valley Authority), helped give jobs, and repaired the environment. Also, the CCC and the AAA were established, and parity prices, a price intended to keep farmers' income steady were set.
WITH MAYONNAISE
The Social Security Act (SSA)
The Social Security Act (SSA)
The Social Security Act (SSA)
donkey balls
Hurricane Sandy made landfall in New Jersey on October 29, 2012 with major impacts in New York. However, Sandy had impacts on the entire U.S. east coast lasting from October 25 until October 31.
A lasting effect of the New Deal can be seen in the establishment of social safety nets, such as Social Security, which provided financial support to the elderly, unemployed, and disabled. Additionally, the New Deal's regulatory frameworks, like those governing banking and securities, continue to influence economic policy and protect consumers. These initiatives laid the groundwork for a more active government role in economic stability and social welfare, shaping modern American society.
The New Deal.
The New Deal
2
Leuchtenburg highlights several weaknesses in the New Deal, including its failure to fully address the needs of marginalized groups, such as African Americans and women, who often received limited benefits. He also critiques the New Deal for its reliance on temporary relief measures rather than delivering lasting structural reforms. Additionally, Leuchtenburg points out that the New Deal's fragmented approach led to inconsistencies and inefficiencies, undermining its overall impact and effectiveness.
1st new deal
2nd new deal