Hoovers policies and attitudes in the years 1929-33 Essay

Asses the view that vacuum-cleans policies and attitudes in the years 1929-33 merely protracted the effect.President Herbert hoover came in to military force in the States in 1928. He was a man with a fortified belief and he believes in individualization and believed passionately in the values of weighed d experience work and enterprise. However, he came in proponent at a time where the States was in an economic crisis, where unemployment was shooting up as well as inflation, the States had entered a new era where disparity was increasing more than ever for practice session New York had one million fired whereas Ohio has 50% of the population unemployed, olibanum it was snappy for vacuums policies to be competent in enjoin to restore prosperity. quotation 7 eliminately argues that vacuums attitudes and policies were inadequate and fai take a work and again. Similarly, ancestry 8 believes that his faith in his own policies has altogether pro eagle-eyeded the eff ect flat more, and so both reservoirs devote a actualize consensus between them. On the a nonher(prenominal) hand generator 9 argues that a lot was truly done in order to get Americans put up on their feet, and then hoovers attitudes and policies were in force(p) for America. However, it is clear that vacuum solely did non do readmly in order to deal with this economic crisis as he was seen to be as a precise stubborn person as source 7 argues and he simple could non read between the lines.Source 7 describes hoover as a real stubborn person who Remained convinced that he was right Hoovers attitudes towards agriculture did non inspection and repair American eliciters at all(prenominal). The uncouth selling act was established in 1929 which unnaturally purchased distantmers surpl workouts at prices above the market price. Hoover gave the Federal Farm Board $500M, til now Hoover still not entail by exactly what he was doing. The agricultural market was in a authoritative decline in America during the thirties and he only encouraged farmers to earn more as the Federal retain board was purchasing their surpluses. Furthermore, he was criminate of throwing a modality tax payers coin which was risquely regressive.Similarly, source 8 believes that Hoover under alsok virtually harmful policies where he in addition resisted congressional attempts to provide more substantial farm moderateness this can be seen through the fact that instead of putting notes into farmers pockets he actually took it away. Farming was seen as the backbone of the American preservation and Hoovers Agricultural Marketing snatch seemed like something that was rushed and neer panorama through which emphasises how Hoover simply lacked knowledge in many areas of the parsimony. Furthermore, he never position about agricultural on an international level and the consequences his actions would throw away, thus his attitudes towards individualisation was cle arly not applicable to American society at that time as American clearly needed a Keynesian begin towards the economy where coin would be significantly pumped in to the circulation of the economy.Source 8 also believes that the Hawley-Smoot tax was significantly disconfirming towards Americans which he sign(a) despite the advice of to the highest degree economists. This emphasises his attitudes towards his policies, he in his own fantasy universe of discourse as source 7 also describes as he simple did not waste any fixed approach towards infantile fixation the damaged economy. Hoover did not pull exactly what was needed for the American economy as if he did, he would deem realised that putting a 40% duty on agricultural products would not give birth stimulated the economy. This fantasy world consisted of just his own approach, which was not thought through, he believed just because he had a very hard work moral principle meant that everyone else could take aim one too , however, this was not the trip in America as Americans simply had no money in their pockets to belt down them come to and they needed relief in order to get back on their feet again.Furthermore, his policies had a very short run away effect as he believed by putting obligations up it would succor farmers gain more revenue. However, with agriculture being such a competitive market, it only led to retaliation as countries all crossways Europe could not afford high prices as they were in an economic crisis too. Furthermore, the Hawley-Smoot tariff resulted in the abandonment of free calling amongst European nations, thus it was extremely damaging for the agricultural market as they could not sell their surpluses and had to eventually dump their nigh(a)s in different countries, so Hoover did pro long the depression.Furthermore, source 8 also argues that Hoovers approach towards unemployment was also not respectable seemly as he plugged direct aid to the unemployed. This is because of his workforce off approach attitude that he undertook during the 1930s was not radical enough and could be seen as pickings things too modestly as source 8 tell aparts. The Emergency Committee for Employment aimed to help agencies provide relief of $500, however, due to his trust attitude he did not acknowledge direct federal relief.This clearly shows how Hoover was not thinking ahead and his attitudes were far behind time as he did not realise exactly how severely Americans needed the governments help and it was life-and-death to interject in the economy as often as assertable. However, Hoovers $500M was not large enough to help the millions of people in America who were unemployed and did not set about the radical necessities in life, growth was literally not possible without the government intervening as GDP was getting lower and lower. However, taking into account that many countries were in a nation debt, it was obviously not possible for Hoover to magi cally get a large sum of money in order to give relief to firms and otherwise sectors, thus there was actually a limited amount that Hoover could do even though he did allow a hands off approach towards America.Source 9 completely contradicts source 8 and 7 as Leuchtenburg believes Hoover Stepped up federal construction and urged state and local governments to accelerate spending thus Hoover did make significant changes that did not pro long the depression. ane of his most significant polices was the reconstruction pay batch which was authorised to lend $1.5 billion to states to finance public works. Not only was this a very direct relief only when it also had many benefits as it helped redress companies as well as banks. One major aspect of the RFC was the fact that it modify 90% to small and medium banks, which was a turning point as outlandish small banks were hardly ever sight and no other president intervened the way Hoover did and this contradicts Pattersons view of Hoover having minimal government intervention, thus his lack of intervention may have been exaggerated by source 7 and 8.The increased capital investment as source 9 suggests also helped the economy as investment was a crucial part of GDP and investment would have allowed firms to innovate in America, thus Hoover had noticed the grim reality of the depression as he was doing what he could have in order to restore the economy. However, the RFC was only available to states that declared bankruptcy and they had to use the money to provide schemes which would earn money so that loans could be repaired and this perfectly fits in with Parrishs view of how the economic crisis call for maximum cooperation , which Hoover was not braggy at that time as all banks and businesses needed some sort of relief which he was not doing. Furthermore, even if he was cooperated it was a little too late, thus Hoover did pro long the depression.Overall, it is clear the Hoovers approaches were not good eno ugh for American society in the 1930s and he did pro long the depression. One vital error that Hoover made was the fact that he was not helping the unemployed as more as he should have as in order to stimulate the economy, a remuneration was needed and with a wage tax could have been paid which could have been used to fund the public with goods. Therefore, if Hoover had considered getting people into work this would have automatically had a positive strike on effect. Furthermore, a hands off approach was not needed in times of the depression as Americans did not have money to get back on their feet as many banks were not giving out loans due to the do that the boom period had on them, therefore a lot of intervention was needed. Thus, it is clear that Hoover did make big mistakes during the depression as he did not see the reality of it and did not try to play the main problems as he had no detailed plan.