The New Deal Prolonged the Great Depression

My opponent says that increasing prices increased profits for the farmers. However, this is completely wrong as in the theory of supply and demand. Higher prices means less people can buy goods and thus farmers earn less profit. Demand was high for food, but because of the lack of supply, prices were higher and people could not afford what they needed. In addition, the AAA created more unemployment among sharecroppers and monopolies among big farmers Even my opponent"s first source recognized the many benefits of the AAA. IIt"s negative effects where accounted for by other programs. "Regardless of this, the Act did make a marked improvement in the life of farmers as prices rose, evictions markedly dropped and the farmers" income increased." [1] My opponent ones again failed to realize that the AAA was only one of many new deal programs. The AAA served to increase prices of food products to increase money circulation and farmer profits. My opponent notes that these farmers were not making any profits due to high prices but neglects the fact that the government subsidized these farmers. Secondly his claim that people were not buying these products is false. Many American"s at the time were able to buy these food products with the help of the CCC, CWA, NRA, SSA, and FHA. These programs where designed to ensure that even with high poverty rates, American"s would be able to meet their basic needs. " In 1933 alone, $100 million was paid out to cotton farmers to plough their crop back into the ground! Six million piglets were slaughtered by the government after it had bought them from the farmers. The meat was canned and given away for free to the unemployed." [1] Without the AAA, American farmers would continue to over produce and with Europe"s economy unable to sustain imports, the American economy would collapse due to surplus. With farmers literally selling their products for virtually nothing, they would not have been able to maintain their farms leading to even more bankruptcy and more bank collapse. This would have futher extended the depression. The New deal programs although not instantaneously, ultimately led to an accelerated recovery. With higher wages, FDR hoped workers would buy good and bring the economy back. This is wrong because of the higher prices. Workers could not afford some goods like they were able to back in the 1920s. The whole reason an industry hires workers is to create profit, but FDR does not seem to understand this. Because industries did not have the profit they needed, they had less flexibility to hire more workers : Ones again my opponent provides no evidence to support his claim that American"s were not able to buy products even with the increase in wages. In his first speech his evidence talked about how the high wages depressed production and how it was not beneficial to African Americans. He never however, provides you with any evidence that explicitly or even implies that Americans did not spend. In order to save the American economy, the Great Depression had to be finished, which the New Deal did not do. What saved the American economy was indeed World War 2, but this is not because of high wages or prices at home. This is because of demand from across the oceans. Because of outside buyers, businesses made more products for other nations and hired more workers. This was not because of the New Deal. The government's actions of giving people more money to spend did not do that. Did the New Deal programs end the depression? The answer would be NO. But that was not the question. Did the New deal Programs accelerate the recovery from the great depression? Yes. The New Deal started the wheel of the American industries which supply the materials used in the war. If the New deal was not in place, America would have had neither the recourses nor the economy to supply the war. The economy would have completely crashed long before the war. Even with the CCC and other similar programs that brought people work, unemployment still stood over 20% as my previous source shows. Okay then imagine what the numbers would have been without these safety nets in placed. The devaluation of the dollar did not work. There was deflation by the end of the 1930s just like it was when the gold was first taken off. ". The first is obviously World War 2 and did need more military goods and the second is the end of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff. The only reason why these foreign countries had so much interest in importing goods from the U.S was because of the devalued dollar. The devalued dollar presented these foreign countries during the war with the cheapest way to buy the resources needed to continue the war. Without a devalued American dollar, these countries would have most like found a different source to obtain their resources. One whose currency had less of a value in the global market than that of the U.S and any other industrial nation. We can clearly see that FDR raised taxes during the Depression from Hoover's 63% increase to over 79% in taxes in 1935 based on the graph I will provide. These taxes where used to supplement the new deal which kept the economy running and supplemented the war. Conclusion: My opponent has yet to provide any solid argument saying that the New deal depressed the economy"s recovery during the great depression. It seems to me that he is only arguing that the New deal programs did not solve the great depression, which is outside the realm of this debate. He talks of FDR"s policies which included high wages and taxes but fails to realize that these policies are not his New Deal Program. The only way he can win this debate is if and only if he can provide a solid argument showing that the economy would have recovered more drastically without the New Deal programs. Sorry for any grammatical errors....I was in a hurry because of orientation. Sources: [1] http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk...