Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Remembering Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the Second Bill of Rights
Topic Started: Mar 9 2014, 01:03 PM (554 Views)
tomdrobin
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Quote:
 
After outlining a set of policies to speed up the war effort, the president looked ahead: “It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American standard of living higher than ever before known.” And in favor of that he proposed the adoption of a Second Bill of Rights.

“This Republic,” he said, “had its beginning and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights… They were our rights to life and liberty. As our Nation has grown in size and stature, however – as our industrial economy expanded – these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.” But, he continued: “We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. ‘Necessitous men are not free men.’” And evoking Jefferson, the Founders and Lincoln, he contended that “In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident” and “We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all regardless of station, race or creed.” This Second Bill of Rights included:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the Nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

In sum, he stated: “All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.”

Roosevelt did not leave it there, however. Distinguishing “clear-thinking businessmen” from the rest, he alerted his fellow citizens to “the grave dangers of rightist reaction.” And he then put Congress itself on the spot: “I ask Congress to explore the means for implementing this economic bill of rights – for it is definitely the responsibility of Congress to do so.” Finally, linking the question of addressing the needs of the war veterans to that of enacting the new bill of rights in a universal program of economic and social security, he declared: “Our fighting men abroad – and their families at home – expect such a program and have the right to insist upon it.”

The labor movement quickly mobilized around the president’s proposal. Liberal politicians, editors, academics and theologians enthusiastically joined in a newly created National Citizens Political Action Committee to bolster labor’s efforts. Civil rights organizations firmly embraced the promise they heard in FDR’s words. And Americans energetically rallied as workers, consumers and citizens.

The labor movement quickly mobilized around President Roosevelt’s proposal. Liberal politicians, editors, academics and theologians enthusiastically joined in a newly created National Citizens Political Action Committee to bolster labor’s efforts.
Roosevelt himself did not retreat in the autumn presidential campaign. He not only reiterated his call for a new bill of rights. He also insisted that the “right to vote must be open to our citizens irrespective of race, color or creed – without tax or artificial restriction of any kind.” And that November, he won re-election to a fourth term with 53.5 percent of the vote and the Democratic Party, though it lost a seat in the Senate, gained 20 in the House.

Tragically, FDR was right about the dangers of rightist reaction. Americans’ hopes and aspirations were stymied by aggressive and well-funded conservative and corporate campaigns. Still, compelled by popular pressure, Congress did enact a “GI Bill of Rights,” an historic initiative that enabled 12,000,000 veterans ­– nearly 1 in 10 Americans – to radically transform themselves and their country for the better. And in years to come their generation would not only make America richer and stronger, but would act anew to progressively realize the vision that Roosevelt had projected.

We need to redeem that vision. President Obama has rightly warned that inequality seriously threatens America’s promise. He may not be able to enact any new grand initiatives before he leaves office. But remembering Franklin Roosevelt’s 1944 Message and speaking with confidence in and to his fellow citizens, he may not only get Americans to vote Democratic in November and set the agenda for 2016. He may also encourage us to go “All Out!” in the fight to renew America’s grand experiment in democracy. That would be a great second-term legacy.


http://billmoyers.com/2014/03/07/remembering-franklin-delano-roosevelt-and-the-second-bill-of-rights/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Berton
Member Avatar
Thunder Fan
[ * ]

Yes indeed. Socialism at its finest.

All under the proud name of Progressives and all they stand for.



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

You should have listened to him. You would not be number 37 from the top on the list of national health care systems for starters and you would not have 15% living below the poverty line compared to 9% in Canada and an income gap graph that looks like an exponential curve.

Posted Image
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pat
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Berton
Mar 9 2014, 01:21 PM
Yes indeed. Socialism at its finest.

All under the proud name of Progressives and all they stand for.



My exact thoughts while reading it. Using government to guarantee results in life. I think that nonsense is what has led to millions ignoring obtaining skills and a good education and of using their most productive years to rise above mediocrity. Why try, it's all given to them mentality.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
colo_crawdad
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
I have known a large number of folks who were helped through the depression by the policies of FDR and not one of them ignored gaining skills and working hard through their prime years of their lives.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pat
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
colo_crawdad
Mar 10 2014, 12:45 AM
I have known a large number of folks who were helped through the depression by the policies of FDR and not one of them ignored gaining skills and working hard through their prime years of their lives.
We all did, that was a different generation where there was still the long held American expectation among each other to get out and apply yourself. You then had the advantage of American business and it's higher wages adding to the fire because Europe was in shambles and Asia had not developed an economy of trade. Maybe the millennials will rekindle the American spirit, we have left them with not much of an alternative, sink or swim.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
colo_crawdad
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
I must have misunderstood you, Pat. When you said: "I think that nonsense is what has led to millions ignoring obtaining skills and a good education and of using their most productive years to rise above mediocrity," U thought you were referring to FDR's programs.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Banandangees
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
telcoman
Mar 9 2014, 10:59 PM
You should have listened to him. You would not be number 37 from the top on the list of national health care systems for starters and you would not have 15% living below the poverty line compared to 9% in Canada and an income gap graph that looks like an exponential curve.

Posted Image

I'd like to address the difference you mentioned as living below the poverty line.... and which country is the more "social" as related to Federal spending.


First, you have to accept the fact that the population demographics are much different in Canada vs US. To be blunt, but factual, Canada does not have the Latino and Black population as major minorities (we also have Asian and Native American populations).

Second, Canada's Federal spending (in 2012) was 16% of GDP compared to the US's Federal spending at 24% of GDP.

Of that % of Federal spending, the US spends 62% on entitlement programs...... not counting military spending, which would take total spending to 80%:

Quote:
 
Spending increases for these combined programs over the past decade have been a major contributor to the accumulated Federal debt of $16.3 trillion, or an estimated $52,000 per person in the US.2 In fact, since 2001 the debt limit has been raised 13-times — a total increase of $10.4 trillion — in order to keeping funding these initiatives.3 This growth in spending is a result of the Keynesian economic philosophy born from the Great Depression, promoting the role of an increasingly activist government during times of economic contractions in order to correct inefficiencies within the private sector.4 The problem with the approach is that the US has neglected to save during those expansionary years; a tenet of Keynesian economics conveniently overlooked by political and monetary leaders alike.

The time for reconsidering the US economic philosophy appears to be at hand. In 2010, Social Security began running a deficit for the first time, paying out $48.9 billion more in entitlement spending relative to receipts,5 and these deficits will deteriorate further after 2015. With 78 million baby boomers retiring and no change to current spending rates, the Heritage foundation estimates that by 2045 the total US federal tax receipts will just cover entitlement spending.


Whereas in Canada:

Quote:
 
Fiscal restraint in Canada began in the mid-1990s when Prime Minister Jean Chretien’s Liberal Party ascended to power, cutting expenditures on social and defense programs in order to reduce federal spending levels. This philosophy continued with the change in leadership when current Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservative Party assumed the majority in 2006. Over this entire time period, Federal spending as a percentage of GDP in Canada dropped from 22% in 1995 to under 16% in 2012.6 In comparison, the US is presently running at 24% government spending as a percentage of GDP. The results of the Canadian experience have been truly impressive. Federal net debt7 in Canada increased by less than 1% per year between 2002 and 2011, and was actually in decline by -1.8% per year up until the global financial recession in 2008.8 Comparatively, US Federal debt increased at an annualized rate of 12.4% over this same time period.9 Similarly, debt-to-GDP in Canada has remained relatively stable from 80.6% in 2003 to roughly 85% in 2012 after falling to 66.5% in 2008,10 while US government debt-to-GDP has nearly doubled from 58.8% in 2003 to 103% in 2012.11 Consequently, it should come as little surprise that Canada also maintains a higher credit rating than the US by both S&P and Moody’s


See more at: http://www.dailypfennig.com/2013/01/13/taming-entitlements-taking-a-page-from-canadas-book/#sthash.kpMMvsyV.dpuf
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Berton
Member Avatar
Thunder Fan
[ * ]
colo_crawdad
Mar 10 2014, 01:12 AM
I must have misunderstood you, Pat. When you said: "I think that nonsense is what has led to millions ignoring obtaining skills and a good education and of using their most productive years to rise above mediocrity," U thought you were referring to FDR's programs.

I thought he was talking about the specific subject which is FDR's proposed second bill of rights. A proposal which FDR made in 1944 long after his depression era programs were long since needed anymore.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Actually canada does have major minorities, they are just different ones than yours
Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis