Talk:History of the United States (1917–1945)

message: It should be noted that the failure of the gold standard after World War 1 was not due to a fundamental failure of the gold standard. We were taken off the gold standard for World War 1 for the explicit purpose of using inflation to fund the war. When we went back on the gold standard after the war, we went on it using the exchange rate that had been established before we went off of it rather than adjusting it to the post-inflationary price of gold. This of course doomed the gold standard.
----
Large parts of this article are identical to large parts of the New Deal article.  This article is also triggering the over-size warnings.  Can someone familar with the content please consider trimming the redundant material out of this article?  (I might yet try it myself but I really don't know this area of history well enough to trust that I'll get it right.)  Rossami 23:32, 29 Oct 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: That looks fine to me, thanks. -- Infrogmation 06:43, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Old talk

message: "It did represent the first instance of a U.S. constitutional amendment that directly regulated social activity."
This is misleading. The amendment didn't directly affect a social activity. It regulated business activities closely related to social activities. There's a stronger case that the 13th amendment, which prohibited the ownership of slaves, is a better example of an amendment directly regulating a social activity. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.208.130.98 (talk) 23:07, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Amendments

message: Comment: One aspect of this era that seems to be essentially ignored is the growth of organized crime and vice. Certainly it is not one of the more auspicious aspects of our history but this was a tremendously important facet of American society during this era. Whereas gambling, liquor, and prostitution had always been a part of American society throughout the 1800s, the rise of Progressivism (particularly the onset of Prohibition) combined with the unparalleled wealth in the U.S. during this period engendered vast organized crime networks throughtout the country (and not just the ones they make movies about; there were huge operations in Florida, Texas, California, and lots of other places). Indeed most people don't realize that the rise of casinos didn't start with Las Vegas. Casinos (illegal but often operating openly) hit a local peak during the Roaring 20s due to lax law enforcement in a lot of communities around the nation. There was subsequently a major wave of repression against all these activities during the 30s, 40s, and 50s which mostly wiped them out except in Nevada and a few other pockets.
I think all of that history deserves a section in this article at minimum.
--Mcorazao (talk) 18:24, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Gangsters

message: The text seems to be biased mainly due to changes by 67.214.28.241. Too lazy to revert stuff myself. 173.181.51.58 (talk) 05:08, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality

message: I changed the first sentence of the "Federal government" section from:
: While, in retrospect, the 1920s are sometimes seen as the last gasp of unregulated "robber-baron" capitalism, there was actually an increasing role for the federal government.
to:
: In retrospect, the 1920s are sometimes seen as the last gasp of unregulated "robber-baron" capitalism. The federal government took on an increasing role in business affairs.
because it didn't make sense to me the first way. The former seems to imply that the federal government supported the robber barons. Such a connection isn't obvious to me, nor did I see it established earlier in the article.  Without any specifics, I don't believe we can make this implication. I added source-request tags to the unsourced statements. I can't easily check the source cited for broadcast regulation, but I expect it doesn't cover anything else mentioned in the paragraph. I invite editors to clarify or expand the rest − but please include specific sources for any claims made. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 03:11, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Robber barons and federal government 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:History of the United States (1776–89) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 01:00, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: I've noticed that, while this article mentions the aftermath of WW1, it doesn't mention the war itself, which is in the article for the preceding era of 1865-1918, the majority of which is more dedicated to Reconstruction, Urbanization, Progressivism, etc., all 19th century processes. I feel as if World War I, which many would consider to be America's true entry into the 20th century, should be included on this page instead. I understand that the war could be considered part of America's "New Imperialism" period, the beginnings of which are discussed in the previous article, but then again some of it is mentioned in this article as well. 2600:4040:9E16:3200:A8DB:19CD:BF9A:CEE3 (talk) 19:18, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree--almost all the US fighting took place in 1918. Rjensen (talk) 22:49, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should World War I be moved here?