The Instigator
sbm1994
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
rockstar_18
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points

FDR's new deal

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/7/2011 Category: Economics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 4,621 times Debate No: 15192
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

sbm1994

Con

FDR's new deal was bad
rockstar_18

Pro

During Franklin D Roosevelts presidency he developed and carried out a plan of getting the United States of America out of the great depression. The goals of the New Deal were known as the 3 R's. Relief, Reform, and Recovery.The success of the 3 R's was immense. He tried to help unemployment and also problems that Hoover left for him to fix, including the banks.He decided to put into place the Emergency Banking Act, which put all banks on national holiday so that they have to fix the problem.He also placed the Economy Act and Beer Wine Revenue Act ,therefore this made them more money.
Debate Round No. 1
sbm1994

Con

Do you know how they made all this money? FDR financed the new deal by tripling u.s. federal taxes. They also introduced a little thing called excise tax. This tax basically took advantage of poor and middle class citizens. The government had a excise tax on pretty much any luxury items such as alcohol, cars, and radios. They didn't just tax just luxury items; they even taxed necessities such as wheel chair tires. Seriously. How can you rightfully tax on an item of importance to the mobility impaired? Seriously, just think about it.
rockstar_18

Pro

well yea but without all that umemployment would of still have happened so all this was for a reason. he created the FERA, the federal emergency relief agency, which increased unemployment assistance to the states and put the government in control of welfare. the federal deposit isurance corporation insured deposits up to 2500 and greatly increased the reliablility of the banks. He also installed the Tennessee Valley Authority. it helped spread electricity throughtout farms in the South, as well as gave jobs to some unemployed men looking for jobs, and helped regulate prices for the newlyfounded hydoelectric industry. they were extremely succesful because they changed the way banks ran themselves as well as helped change the neglect of the south.
Debate Round No. 2
sbm1994

Con

Sure, those acts may have helped the unemployed somewhat. But FDR's new deal also created some acts that did more harm than good the unemployed such as the National Industrial Recovery Act. This act cut back production and forced wages above market levels- making it more expensive for employers to hire people. Do you know how many men were effected by this act? An estimated 500,000! Another act that hurt the middle class and poor was the Agricultural Adjustment Act- which cut back farm production and devastated many tenant farmers who needed to work to support themselves and/or their families. Back to the National Industrial Recovery Act, FDR hammered consumers by forcing them to pay ABOVE-market prices for goods and services. I'm well aware that FDR passed the new deal with good intentions. Ultimately, the new deal did more harm than good to middle class and poor citizens, thus FDR's new deal is a failure.
rockstar_18

Pro

Well yea I have to agree but without the FDR deal thus there wouldnt be a country because it would of have collasped and we wouldn't even would of had have world war 2. Thus the deal had some succes in it. Imagine what would of have happened it none of this would of have happened. How would we end up and what would of happend. We would not have existed then economically wise also.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by socialpinko 4 years ago
socialpinko
sbm1994rockstar_18Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: I was set to vote for Pro until the concluding round. The country would have collapsed really? Though I suppose neither side really provided any sourcing or real substantiation for their points. Subpar debate in all, no clear winner came out on top.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
sbm1994rockstar_18Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: These debates would actually benefits from an opening summary, cited support and an end result. Con could not sustain the BoP.