Adam Martin: Coolidge presided over the 20's, when the Federal Reserve pumped massive amounts of credit into the system. I don't think he can be called a good president.
Coolidge presided over the 20's, when the Federal Reserve pumped massive amounts of credit into the system. I don't think he can be called a good president.
Yeah but the Fed would have done that regardless of who was in office.
Is there a site one can go to to see how many military and civilian deaths (on both sides preferably) were caused by president's military actions?
Dondoolee: I think it is far to early to rank obama as one of the worst ten yet. If he has implemented some bone headed policies thier full effects have yet to be felt, plus he hasn't drafted yet nor killed as many people as his past 3 predecessors yet. I still don't think he has reached the heights of TR, FDR, Truman, LBJ or Wilson yet by a long shot.
I think it is far to early to rank obama as one of the worst ten yet. If he has implemented some bone headed policies thier full effects have yet to be felt, plus he hasn't drafted yet nor killed as many people as his past 3 predecessors yet. I still don't think he has reached the heights of TR, FDR, Truman, LBJ or Wilson yet by a long shot.
Obama has and will spend more money in his first 100 days in office than Bush Junior possibly could in two years.
Political Atheists Blog
He has to deal with Bush's mess. As I've said before, it's Hoover and Roosevelt all over again. Only worse, considering America is already involved everywhere and spends gazillions on military.
If I hear not allowed much oftener; said Sam, I'm going to get angry.
J.R.R.Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings
^And people have credit cards and unemployment and welfare keeps people from working, and all the obligations of fdic and bailouts. Plus entitlement costs. Student loan debt for young people and even established people in 100ks. Commercial real estate, failing landlords have more taxes obligations then before.
Yeah, the 30s would be cake compared to a real collapse now. At least those pennies you found were worth something.
As a foreigner, I oppose you guys' hatred against Truman. Think about how many East Europeans he saved from Soviet Totalitarianism.
Obama #1, FDR #2, Bush & Wilson #3
Erickk: Think about how many East Europeans he saved from Soviet Totalitarianism.
Think about how many East Europeans he saved from Soviet Totalitarianism.
Not a damn one.
Pro Christo et Libertate integre!
Erickk: As a foreigner, I oppose you guys' hatred against Truman. Think about how many East Europeans he saved from Soviet Totalitarianism. Obama #1, FDR #2, Bush & Wilson #3
Think of how many Japanese civilians he distegrated to save the Japanese from totalitarianism. Or how many US Citizens he drafted and killed to save half of Korea from totalitarianism.
Kill some Japanese for the indirect undetermined sake of some Soviets? Surely cause of praises.
I think without the two A Bombs, the war will persist at least some months longer with more and more Chinese died.
Sorry, but there would be many people fell into Stalin's sphere of influence. If Truman did not act then the British probably would withdraw with no reinforcement for Greece. Moreover, the Truman Doctrine did make the Red Tsar back down a little bit. He made concessions on Turkey and due to his misconception that the capitalist powers would destroy each other, (in this case Stalin was in fact expecting the British would fight the Americans. Some words in Truman's speech to "scare the hell out of the American people" seemed to confirm Stalin his false belief) he did not make big moves until Marshall Plan was confirmed to him.
Furthermore, if the Americans did not intervene into Europe, really Stalin would someday take advantage of this vacuum.
The japanese military was killing people in china, so the solution is to nuke a bunch of japanese civilians? Great stratagy.
banned: The japanese military was killing people in china, so the solution is to nuke a bunch of japanese civilians? Great stratagy.
Sounds like typical statist rationale - we need a monopoly gang to violate rights in order to prevent the violation of rights. The only organization that can prevent theft must steal to exist. Murdering civilians is necessary to prevent the murder of civilians. War is peace, freedom is slavery, etc.
I like Parsidius' list, although I'd be fine with Bush II in place of Clinton, or tied. Mainly because he did much of the same stuff Clinton did-- times a factor of 5 or 10.
That is funny how they have a pattern isn't it? The least Obama could have done was think of a NEW buzzword, instead of recycling "New Deal".... but I guess green recycling trends are "in" nowadays huh?
He could have even combined "New Deal/Great Society" and called his program "New Society" (i.e. a socialist and fascist one) or "Great Deal" (for all his friends, political allies, and special interests).
(Edit: Oh wow, 5 pages huh? Guess I'm late! )
The worst president:
Jefferson
'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael
Laughing Man: The worst president: Jefferson
Uh, why?
He was like Ronald Reagan, wonderful rherotic, horrible application.
Laughing Man: He was like Ronald Reagan, wonderful rherotic, horrible application.
Fair enough I guess, but I'm still gonna have to go with the likes of FDR, Wilson, Lincoln, etc.!
Ansury:Fair enough I guess, but I'm still gonna have to go with the likes of FDR, Wilson, Lincoln, etc.!
But we expect that from statists. I feel it is much more devastating for a 'libertarian' to become a 'statesman' then a statist.
Laughing Man: Ansury:Fair enough I guess, but I'm still gonna have to go with the likes of FDR, Wilson, Lincoln, etc.! But we expect that from statists. I feel it is much more devastating for a 'libertarian' to become a 'statesman' then a statist.
Didn't Lincoln have a lot of libertarian rhetoric?
At most, I think only 5% of the adult population would need to stop cooperating to have real change.
Spideynw: Laughing Man: Ansury:Fair enough I guess, but I'm still gonna have to go with the likes of FDR, Wilson, Lincoln, etc.! But we expect that from statists. I feel it is much more devastating for a 'libertarian' to become a 'statesman' then a statist. Didn't Lincoln have a lot of libertarian rhetoric?
No. He didn't hide that he was a tyrant.
Abraham Lincoln: Plainly, the central idea of secession, is the essence of anarchy. A majority, held in restraint by constitutional checks and limitations, and always changing easily with deliberate changes of popular opinions and sentiments, is the only true sovereign of a free people. Whoever rejects it, does, of necessity, fly to anarchy or to despotism.
Plainly, the central idea of secession, is the essence of anarchy. A majority, held in restraint by constitutional checks and limitations, and always changing easily with deliberate changes of popular opinions and sentiments, is the only true sovereign of a free people. Whoever rejects it, does, of necessity, fly to anarchy or to despotism.
Sounds like a democracy worshipper, 1861 style.
Fine, but how r u gonna end the war?
The Japanese had already offered conditional surrender, two months before Truman ordered the bombing. Two weeks before the bomb was dropped, they were making overtures of unconditional surrender. So Truman went ahead and killed a few hundred thousand people, then gave the Japanese the conditions they had originally requested.
Truman was a mass-murderer. Stop trying to apply a different set of morals to the actions of a regular "private" individual, and one acting on the behalf of a fictional collective "nation state". The mental and philosophical gymnastics will drive you insane, eventually.
MacFall:The Japanese had already offered conditional surrender, two months before Truman ordered the bombing. Two weeks before the bomb was dropped, they were making overtures of unconditional surrender. So Truman went ahead and killed a few hundred thousand people, then gave the Japanese the conditions they had originally requested. Truman was a mass-murderer. Stop trying to apply a different set of morals to the actions of a regular "private" individual, and one acting on the behalf of a fictional collective "nation state". The mental and philosophical gymnastics will drive you insane, eventually.
Where did you get this information? What did we do to lead them to unconditionally surrender before any invasion or bombing?
If I wrote it more than a few weeks ago, I probably hate it by now.
MacFall: The Japanese had already offered conditional surrender, two months before Truman ordered the bombing. Two weeks before the bomb was dropped, they were making overtures of unconditional surrender. So Truman went ahead and killed a few hundred thousand people, then gave the Japanese the conditions they had originally requested.
Not true at all. The emperor refused to surrender, under any conditions, even after Hiroshima. There is some debate as to whether the emperor had actually known that Hiroshima had been bombed at the time of his refusal. The infrastructure was so decemated, it's quite possible word had not reached him yet,
MacFall:Truman was a mass-murderer. Stop trying to apply a different set of morals to the actions of a regular "private" individual, and one acting on the behalf of a fictional collective "nation state". The mental and philosophical gymnastics will drive you insane, eventually.
Agreed.
faber est suae quisque fortunae
I must first comment on how ridiculous it is that an Austrian who challenges all established institution would make a comment like "I pray that these men recieve mercy in their judgement from The Almighty." Believing in an "Almighty" is as outrageous as believing in the State as an omnipotent entity.
Second, you are incorrect by pinning the printing money crime on Lincoln. If you knew anything about history you would know that the Union did NOT print fiat money, but rather did an OUTSTANDING job financing the war through the sales of bonds (known as 5-20s) by Jay Cooke. In fact, these mentioned sales of bonds were 100% redeemable in gold and were done to PREVENT printing money.
Woodrow Wilson did not "make" the Federal Reserve. He gave his signature to a bill drafted by others. He even regretted his decision and with a little effort (which I am not willing to provide) you can find plenty of quotes from him saying how he realized his mistake and he had forfeited the rights of the civilians to the banking elites.
When Truman came into office, he did not even know we were producing an atomic bomb, so to blame him for the mass murder of civilians with the use of atomic bombs is a scapegoat. Also, Killing people in WAR is NOT MURDER. Regardless of your views or beliefs, war is (or at least was) legally justified through declarations of war. Murder is the UNLAWFUL killing of another, therefore killing in war is not murder.
I kind of agree with FDR being a bad president. But everyone knows Warren Harding was the worst president, hence the "Warren Harding effect"
This is contradictory to what people have been saying on the thread regarding the nature of the Fed. Austrians are complaining that the Fed is not private at all and that it answers to the president. You claim that the Fed would not be influenced by the president, thus making it at least somewhat private. Care to get your facts straight?
TravisWadman: I must first comment on how ridiculous it is that an Austrian who challenges all established institution would make a comment like "I pray that these men recieve mercy in their judgement from The Almighty." Believing in an "Almighty" is as outrageous as believing in the State as an omnipotent entity. Second, you are incorrect by pinning the printing money crime on Lincoln. If you knew anything about history you would know that the Union did NOT print fiat money, but rather did an OUTSTANDING job financing the war through the sales of bonds (known as 5-20s) by Jay Cooke. In fact, these mentioned sales of bonds were 100% redeemable in gold and were done to PREVENT printing money. Woodrow Wilson did not "make" the Federal Reserve. He gave his signature to a bill drafted by others. He even regretted his decision and with a little effort (which I am not willing to provide) you can find plenty of quotes from him saying how he realized his mistake and he had forfeited the rights of the civilians to the banking elites. When Truman came into office, he did not even know we were producing an atomic bomb, so to blame him for the mass murder of civilians with the use of atomic bombs is a scapegoat. Also, Killing people in WAR is NOT MURDER. Regardless of your views or beliefs, war is (or at least was) legally justified through declarations of war. Murder is the UNLAWFUL killing of another, therefore killing in war is not murder. I kind of agree with FDR being a bad president. But everyone knows Warren Harding was the worst president, hence the "Warren Harding effect"
1) With regards to your "almighty" comment: This really isn't an argument made by you, or a very weak one at best. More importantly, if you haven't figured this out yet; comments like this tend to lead to very unproductive conversations, particularly on a thread that has little or nothing to do with theism vs atheism. This is baiting for an argument well left field of the topic presented. I say this is an atheist.
2) Good point made by Lincoln with the bonds, however it is a minor issue when people talk about why they hate Lincoln
3) On WIlson: If you can find quotes of a criminal regretting his criminal action, he is still a criminal. That aspect of your argument is a big who cares. Likewise, resposibility ultimatly is on the person with the authority to or not to let an action happen.
4) Who cares what Truman did or did not know before he came into office, he knew the bomb existed when he gave the thumbs up to drop on a civilian target. Would you call Osama bin Laden a murderer for ordering planes to hit a building, or Hitler a murder for ording the deaths of millions of slavs? Also you seem to think war is a legit institution of the state (which you also seem to think is a good institution). If that is your mind set you are way out of step with most peoples line of thoughts on this site.
It would probably be more productive to start a thread explaining why you think war/ the state is legit, rather than talking about US presidents, as there is going to be a lot of talking over peoples heads due to the major differences in ideologies.
Dondoolee:1) With regards to your "almighty" comment: This really isn't an argument made by you, or a very weak one at best. More importantly, if you haven't figured this out yet; comments like this tend to lead to very unproductive conversations, particularly on a thread that has little or nothing to do with theism vs atheism. This is baiting for an argument well left field of the topic presented. I say this is an atheist.
It is not an argument, but it is an interesting observation. The existence of an all-powerful ruler of the universe contrasts violently with the worldview of a classical liberal. If you believe in a personal God and you are a classical liberal, you should feel cognitive dissonance to say the least.
TravisWadman:Also, Killing people in WAR is NOT MURDER.
Sure it is.
TravisWadman:Murder is the UNLAWFUL killing of another, therefore killing in war is not murder.
Every government legalizes murder for the purpose of war.
Big deal. Laws as made by the state are meaningless and arbitrary. They are not rooted in any morality or ethic except that which drives the mob and power seeking.
TravisWadman:I kind of agree with FDR being a bad president. But everyone knows Warren Harding was the worst president, hence the "Warren Harding effect"
You have so much to unlearn.
TravisWadman: Also, Killing people in WAR is NOT MURDER.
February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church. Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."
TravisWadman: Second, you are incorrect by pinning the printing money crime on Lincoln. If you knew anything about history you would know that the Union did NOT print fiat money, but rather did an OUTSTANDING job financing the war through the sales of bonds (known as 5-20s) by Jay Cooke. In fact, these mentioned sales of bonds were 100% redeemable in gold and were done to PREVENT printing money.
No. The United States ran large deficits and printed money (Greenback/Legal Tender Acts) to finance the war. It also established the National Banks in the National Banking Act 1863 to help manage the money supply and debt.. Not to mention an income tax.
Anyways, one day I sat down and wrote down a list of the 43 presidents in a complete ranking.
With 1 being the best, to 43 being the worst, here they are
1. Martin Van Buren
2. Ruther B. Hayes
3. Grover Cleveland
4. John Tyler
5. Chester Arthur
6. Warren G. Harding
7. George Washington
8. Ulysses S. Grant
9. Calvin Coolidge
10. Zachary Taylor
11. Dwight D. Eisenhower
12. Jimmy Carter
13. Andrew Johnson
14. James Garfield
15. James Monroe
16. William Henry Harrison
17. John Quincy Adams
18. Gerald Ford
19. Bill Clinton
20. James K. Polk
21. Benjamin Harrison
22. Millard Fillmore
23. John Adams
24. Thomas Jefferson
25. Andrew Jackson
26. James Buchanan
27. Franklin Pierce
28. James Madison
29. John F. Kennedy
30. William Howard Taft
31. Abraham Lincoln
32. William McKinley
33. Richard Nixon
34. Ronald Reagan
35. George H. Bush
36. Theodore Roosevelt
37. Lyndon b. Johnson
38. Harry S. Truman
39. Herbert Hoover
40. Barack Obama
41. George W. Bush
42. Franklin D. Roosevelt
43. Woodrow Wilson
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
[email protected] | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap