The Instigator
wpfairbanks
Pro (for)
Losing
39 Points
The Contender
Babers
Con (against)
Winning
45 Points

The New Deal: Good or Bad

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
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
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/6/2009 Category: Politics
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 22,711 times Debate No: 7273
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (8)
Votes (15)

 

wpfairbanks

Pro

Recently, the FDR's New Deal program has come under fire, due to the recent idiological split on the current U.S. budget.

I would argue that the spending on the New Deal caused Americans to overcome the Great Depression
Babers

Con

Before I start,I'm a supporter of FDR and his New Deal, but because the topic is interesting I thought I'd have a go at arguing the other way!
The First thing that FDR did pass the EBA and closed all the banks in the USA and re-opened 5000 and put money into them.This was not a good idea seeing as many jobs were lost in this process and some banks that were invested in by the government continued to go bankrupt-money was lost.
Before the Wall Street Crash, 2.6 million Americans were unemployed and in 1941, 6 million.This shows that despite the spending in the New Deal, unemployment did not return to anywhere near its original rate.
The Alphabet Agencies (CCC,TVA,PWA) created many jobs but they were temporary and workers would soon be unemployed again. They got around 1$ per day-not enough to support workers and families. Some agencies were unconstitutional.
Didn't help blacks much who were in poverty most.
Unemployment only decreased significantly when the USA joined WWII in 1941.
Debate Round No. 1
wpfairbanks

Pro

When Mr. Roosevelt inherited the unemployment from Mr. Hoover in 1933, the unemployment was 12,830,000. When the New Deal policies originally closed in 1937, the unemployment was 7,700,000 million. True, there was brief recession in 1937, but in Dec. of 1941, when the US declared a role in World War II, there were 5,500,000 unemployed. The war dropped this eventually down to 1,040,000 and that the unemployment was still higher after the ND then before the crash in 1929, but this is not an indicator of Mr. Roosevelt's policy. IF he had taken office in 1929, the one could legitimately argue that because he never reduced the unemployment to the original rates, the New Deal was a failure. But, this argument is fallacious for FDR's actions while president dropped unemployment substantially.

The claim that the New Deal did not "help blacks much who were in poverty most" is simply not true. Mr. Roosevelt gave 10% of the welfare spending to blacks, for they were 10% of the population.
Babers

Con

The claim that the New Deal did not "help blacks much who were in poverty most" is simply not true." - http://www.cato.org...
"The war dropped this eventually down to 1,040,000". Even pro has admitted that WWII conquered unemployment and not the ND. Pro goes on to say that "the New Deal was a failure",but only if FDR had taken office in 1929.It doesn't matter when FDR took office, in fact it was better for him that he took office in 1933 because it gave him a chance to observe and study the Depression and therefore the ND was a failure because FDR studied the Depression,yet could not solve it.
The ND was not good,especially in the long term because it has created a dependency culture. Since then,Americans rely on the government for everything the US taxpayer's money is going to people who tax-dodge and can't be bothered to get a job because they know that they will receive social security (started by the ND)-is that where you want your money to go?
Debate Round No. 2
wpfairbanks

Pro

What does Black treatment have to do with the success of the ND? We must look at what the objective of the ND was, and if that alone was successful. Well, FDR stated that the objective of the ND was to decrease unemployment. When the ND was finished, unemployment had dropped from when he enacted the ND. Therefore, the ND was successful based on how FDR defined success, which is what we are examining. If WWII dropped unemployment further, it is irrelevant because the ND had finished and unemployment had already seen substantial decrease. FDR did not define success as dropping the Unemployment to pre-Great Depression terms, but rather from 1933 terms, thus the ND was successful. I would rather not dignify the last part of Con's argument, given its fallacious nature. He cannot prove this, so why type it? Besides, Lincoln enacted Nationalistic legislature 70 yrs prior funded by "taxpayers", as well as the Civil War pension fund which inspired SC. Who created dependancy culture?
-Thank you
Babers

Con

"Unemployment had dropped from when he enacted the ND.Therefore, the ND was successful based on how FDR defined success, which is what we are examining"-we aren't examining how FDR defined success!The topic is "The New Deal: Good or Bad".That's like saying the war in Iraq was (is) a success because we captured Saddam and because Bush said it was! But the war has not been particularly successful as many have died.
FDR TRIPLED federal taxes (still TRIPLED today!) to fund Social Security (to people like Wesley Snipes) (SS not SC as Pro incorrectly stated).
If the ND was so "successful", then why did it "finish[ed]"? Surely,if it was so successful it would've continued until after 1937/8 otherwise it's the first organisation I've ever known to "finish[ed]" despite its "success"!
ND: helped businesses more than the people,maximized dependency culture (still here today),tripled taxes,brought on another recession(1937),just masked and didn't reduce unemployment to original rate (WWII did).
Debate Round No. 3
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by wpfairbanks 7 years ago
wpfairbanks
Nobody give ashit.
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
My vote:

Before- CON
After- CON (I know more of this topic than both of you combined.)
Conduct- TIE
Grammar- TIE
Arguments- CON (pro makes many false arguements and strays from the topic; CON's are only slightly better because he pointed out that the employment change was artificial)
Sources- Tie (No one used sources)
Posted by wpfairbanks 7 years ago
wpfairbanks
It cut unemployment in half.
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
No! The New Deal was NOT good!

It was the first step towards Keynesian Socialism.

WWII brought us out of the depression and the New Deal hardly even improved the unemployment problem. What a stupid thought.
Posted by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
The extreme character limitation kept the debate to an exchange of bumper stickers. No references by either side, essential to the restricted format. Good topic, too bad.
Posted by wpfairbanks 7 years ago
wpfairbanks
Thanks a lot Babers, I had a lot of fun as well. I shouldn't have restricted it to 1000 characters, that was my fault. I am a journalist at my high school, so I think in terms of writing some garbage of about 2000 characters. I never realized how little 1000 characters is when passion is involved! Thanks again
Posted by Babers 7 years ago
Babers
Great debate we I had there, wpfairbanks! It's a shame that you limited the round length to only 1000 characters but I understand that there wasn't much to say about the successes of the New Deal and that you wanted to restrict me from telling our audience all of the failures of the New Deal (8,000 characters) lol! - only joking! But really, I ran out of characters which is why I didn't leave any spaces between full stops and the beginning of the next sentence! I really enjoyed the debate and it was extremely fun to argue for something that I'm against (I think that the New Deal was successful!)
Thanks again for the good debate wpfairbanks!
Babers
Posted by s0m31john 7 years ago
s0m31john
You're lucky I haven't read my copy of "New Deal or Raw Deal: How FDR's Economic Legacy Has Damaged America" yet, or I would totally own this debate.
15 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
wpfairbanksBabersTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by cstidham 3 years ago
cstidham
wpfairbanksBabersTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by Willoweed 5 years ago
Willoweed
wpfairbanksBabersTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Con really didn't make arguments he jsut made statments
Vote Placed by quarterexchange 5 years ago
quarterexchange
wpfairbanksBabersTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision:
Vote Placed by Sniperjake1994 5 years ago
Sniperjake1994
wpfairbanksBabersTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: to balance wpfairbanks vote bomb
Vote Placed by RacH3ll3 7 years ago
RacH3ll3
wpfairbanksBabersTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by PGdebateQUEEN 7 years ago
PGdebateQUEEN
wpfairbanksBabersTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by lamills 7 years ago
lamills
wpfairbanksBabersTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by trendem 7 years ago
trendem
wpfairbanksBabersTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by sabrafink 7 years ago
sabrafink
wpfairbanksBabersTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70