Morehouse College
- Thread starter GK4Herd
- Start date
Say what? The second phase of the industrial revolution began in the U.S. around 1850 and exploded between 1890 and 1910. By WWI we were already the powerful nation and economy.
Please read any article you find about the GI Bill and let me know if you find one that does not agree with my statement. Without it we could have easily had another "great depression".
Not really.
No doubt it helped to jump start a post war/depression economy by helping to pay for educations and low interest housing loans, but to suggest the GI bill “built the country” is....kind of, absurd.
The GI bill helped create the vast middle class that moved America from war footing to a construction boom of housing and highways that moved millions to the suburbs with effects still felt in cities to this day. The bill allowed millions of men and women to achieve education and careers they would have never dreamed of during the depression and WW2.
You know what else helped form the middle class and what is a large part of why there was such a big economic boom in the United States?
We bombed the crap out of Europe's economic capability for 5 years.
We bombed the crap out of Europe's economic capability for 5 years.
The GI Bill must have changed a lot through the years, because it didn't hardly pay shit for me. The ACF (Army College Fund) is what carried most of the load.
It isn’t that you’re wrong, it’s just that you are talking about two separate times in US history and two separate times of growth. Why would you you take an adversarial position on that? Of course the transition between agrarian to an industrial society produced a lot of winners. So did the post WWII boom. Just because a government sponsored helping hand up created opportunity for a post war society, doesn’t mean you have to diminish it by going back 40 to 50 years to find another boom that you can attribute to your philosophical point of view.
Sadly(speaking of war in general) that’s exactly what happened. The US survived two world wars with an unscathed land mass and after 1945 had a 20-30 year free run at economic dominance.
As has been stated, we (the United States) were in a great position to take advantage of a situation at the end of WWII where essentially ever other country that produced manufactured goods had been, effectively, destroyed. The educational component of the GI Bill had an insignificant impact of what occurred in the U.S. Economy from 1945 through 1955.
European countries also had extraordinary GDP growth after the war. Their's was based on rebuilding, ours was based on expansion. Immediately after the war, we had significant GDP contraction. This was due to the fact that we were no longer building planes, tanks, ships, and everything else that goes into war, however, that reduction in government spending was quickly replaced by consumer spending.
We had full employment, the emergence of the two income family, etc. Again, none of that was based on the government paying for some people's college. I have nothing against paying for education for veterans, quite the opposite, I am 100% for it. I feel this way because I view it as part of their compensation for serving, so it's an earned benefit. If a kid wants to go to college and can't afford it, join the service and earn the benefit.
European countries also had extraordinary GDP growth after the war. Their's was based on rebuilding, ours was based on expansion. Immediately after the war, we had significant GDP contraction. This was due to the fact that we were no longer building planes, tanks, ships, and everything else that goes into war, however, that reduction in government spending was quickly replaced by consumer spending.
We had full employment, the emergence of the two income family, etc. Again, none of that was based on the government paying for some people's college. I have nothing against paying for education for veterans, quite the opposite, I am 100% for it. I feel this way because I view it as part of their compensation for serving, so it's an earned benefit. If a kid wants to go to college and can't afford it, join the service and earn the benefit.
Until the GI Bill was passed into legislation only the wealthiest Americans could send their children to college. The original bill helped to produce 22,000 dentist, 67,000 doctors, 91,000 scientist, 238,000 teachers, 240,000 accountants, and 450,000 engineers. Most of these veterans could not have attended without the GI Bill. Add the impact of being able to acquire low interest loans to build homes, you are talking about the building of a middle class that did not exist previously. Most researchers will suggest that this piece of legislation had the greatest significant impact on our growth as a country. We know what happened after WWI and it wasn't pretty. Roosevelt and other elected officials did not want a repeat.
Please read my response to "Raleigh". Most writers and researchers of the this legislation do not agree with your assessment and I don't either!
The reason you’re being challenged, although you bring up fairly compelling statistics, is ideologically rooted. I posted a feel good story about a generous act that could impact the lives of these college grads and the thought it could be remotely considered a liberal leaning act immediately brought out, “Made possible by capitalism.” Of course capitalism is how the billionaire made his money. Does that somehow diminish the impact of generosity and a good deed? Does that diminish the value of the GI Bill? Nope. Both capitalism and helping hand ups have influence.
The next thing we know someone will be bringing up the economic impact of the paradigm shift in the economy one and a half centuries ago in a belief that it somehow minimizes your observation that providing a means for a once unattainable college education to the middle class and poor had a significant impact.
But as I said, the driver behind those who feel compelled to challenge a simple story of philanthropy is ideologically motivated. I don’t guess these kids suffered enough for their ideological leanings. Crushing debt should be the penalty for those without means to try to elevate themselves in society I guess. And that GI Bill thing you talked about...to Hell with all those dentist, doctors, and scientist who have a major influence on our society and on our economy. Government give aways is just too damn liberal sounding. There just isn’t enough boot strap pull ups.
A number of dem politicians are pointing to the euphoria as a means to justify their calls for a "free" education. I'm all for higher education, waaay more for skills training, but they're focusing on the wrong part. If they dial in on why degrees cost so much & serious education reform, the public might be more willing to take them seriously.
This part I agree with. I also know people use student loans to fund frivolous lifestyle choices while in college too. I don’t subscribe to living in poverty, but I’ve heard stories of way too many people using their loans to fund their lifestyle rather than or in addition to their education. It’s hard to feel sorry for that person. But I have to believe that for every kid that gets a degree that simply would be out of reach if not for programs like Promise, GI Bill, grants, student loans, etc...that is growing the economy with their increased income and spending power. It gives their children in turn a chance to break away from the generational poverty they’re locked in as well. It relieves the stress of government programs to the poor. We can be for both fiscal responsibility, capitalism, as well as programs that don’t give people fish, but teaches them to fish.
So just because a person believes that a helping hand can make a positive change with those without means to attend college, it doesn’t mean that fiscal responsibility can’t be exercised as well. The problem with the ideological divide is that both sides maintain absolute beliefs when the world doesn’t work that way. We need to get away from this absolute way of thinking. The need to make an act of charity a springboard to espousing our ideology becomes a symptom of that divide.
Some of the things he says in that are just flat false, GK. It has nothing to do with ideology.
The GI Bill had absolutely nothing to do with the underlying reasons for the economic expansion of the post-war era. Why were loans cheaper? Massive amounts of liquidity in the market. Not because of the G.I. Bill.
Also is just flat untrue to say that only the wealthy got to go to college before the GI bill it's just asinine.
Lots of poor people went to college before the end of the second World War.
Besides my GI bill was a joke since I was under the post-vietnam one. Starting in 2002 I got $600 a month. You think that paid for any of my education?
A lot of people think the GI bill actually pays for your college, and vets go to college for free, but it does not. It is a block grant of cash into your bank account.
I know it's easier just to dismiss things by saying it's an ideological thing.
The GI Bill had absolutely nothing to do with the underlying reasons for the economic expansion of the post-war era. Why were loans cheaper? Massive amounts of liquidity in the market. Not because of the G.I. Bill.
Also is just flat untrue to say that only the wealthy got to go to college before the GI bill it's just asinine.
Lots of poor people went to college before the end of the second World War.
Besides my GI bill was a joke since I was under the post-vietnam one. Starting in 2002 I got $600 a month. You think that paid for any of my education?
A lot of people think the GI bill actually pays for your college, and vets go to college for free, but it does not. It is a block grant of cash into your bank account.
I know it's easier just to dismiss things by saying it's an ideological thing.
Do you really believe it wasn’t ideology that prompted the “capitalism” remark? And Bankers dismissing the value of the GI Bill using the industrial revolution?
The latest iteration of the GI Bill does pay tuition, books and supplies, and a monthly check dependency based. This same monetary benefit has been available to service connected disabled veterans participating in VA's Vocational Rehabilitation Program (Chapter 31), since 1943.
1) Notice which GI Bill I was under.
2) Current law has nothing to do with 1945.
3) 95% of vets are not service connected disabled. Not sure what effect that 5% has on the economy.
2) Current law has nothing to do with 1945.
3) 95% of vets are not service connected disabled. Not sure what effect that 5% has on the economy.
In the meantime, that sure was a great gesture for the rich guy to give those kids a great start in life.
Three things led to American technological dominance in the 40s, 50s, and 60s: government funded research in collaboration with universities and corporations, an explosion in engineers, many educated under the GI Bill....and Nazis.
I did not dismiss the GI Bill by using the industrial revolution. I dismissed the false narrative that claimed the GI Bill "built this country" after WWII. It was a hyperbolic statement in that this country was already a world superpower prior to WWII and, if anything, the effects of the war itself, accelerated that position.
I don’t disagree with much that you are saying either. I believe that the industrial revolution was a game changer. WWII as well as most wars offer a jumpstart on the economy. But remember, when we entered WWII we were still suffering the lingering effects of the depression. Unemployment was at 25%. Revving up military industrial production at the same time as putting millions of young men on government payroll put the depression in the rear view mirror.
The war definitely had a positive effect on the economy. I don’t think anyone could argue that the immediate effect of the war on the economy outweighed the effects of the GI Bill...initially. But the GI Bill’s impact is much more significant then you believe. When the war ended, 16 million Americans serving in the war were dumped back into the economy. There’s all kinds of issues with trying to assimilate that many people back into the economy. Over 8 million men took advantage of the free education and low interest housing. It built what some historians called a modern knowledge economy. In addition to 72’s numbers on professionals entering the work force taking advantage of the GI Bill, it also provided the education for 14 Nobel Prize winners, three Supreme Court Justices, three presidents, a dozen senators, and two Pulitzer Prize winners.
As 72 pointed out, there is a strong consensus among scholars and historians of the tremendous impact of the bill...
http://archive.boston.com/ae/books/articles/2009/09/10/a_critical_look_at_the_gi_bills_impact/
https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/us-history/postwarera/postwar-era/a/the-gi-bill
https://www.grin.com/document/345654
https://www.defense.gov/explore/sto...s-of-the-gi-bill-how-transformative-its-been/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-the-gi-bill-changed-america/
My only point of contention is the need to challenge the statement at all. Not that you are incorrect. You being correct just doesn’t invalidate his point. Which brings me back to my original point. The whole thing that led to this discussion to begin with is capitalism and economic semantics being argued on a thread posted to simply point out a kind act. With all respect to Keep, I can’t be convinced that ideology didn’t lead us down this road.
The original GI Bill did pay tuition until 1956. Rewrites of the Bill only paid a monthly subsistence check until the current law was passed in 2009 reinstating payments for tuition, books and supplies. Innkeeper, over 40% of veterans from the Iraq and Afghanistan war are receiving Service Connected Disability compensation. It has been increasing for a number of years because of the protracted engagements and multiple deployments. Please review the following information about the impact of the GI Bill on Higher Education in America: https://www.worldwidelearn.com/education-advisor/indepth/history-higher-education.php . I invite any of you that are questioning this to reference any web article you can find to support your stance. I have provided accurate data and information from reliable sources. I am a veteran and worked for VA over 30 years. My father was a WWII veteran but could not take advantage of the educational provisions of the original GI Bill because he returned to his old job. He did use the home loan provision. The GI Bill enabled me to complete a Masters Degree and eventually become employed as a Counseling Psychologist with VA's Vocational Rehabilitation program. I was extremely fortunate to have this opportunity. It was a great job and I learned a great deal from the folks that gave so much to our country. Banker, we were going to have another great depression, if not for this legislation. We did a very poor job after WWI and it eventually led to the great depression. Roosevelt and other elected officials did not want to make this same mistake. The housing boom, educational opportunities, and upward mobility provided by this legislation is unmatched in our history.
That and the VA wants to get people hooked on mind altering drugs and give them pills upon pills.
I know it it way up high and not you, but as a nation we should be ashamed of the way the veterans are treated.
Anyway back to the GI Bill.
GI Bill certainly a big factor proving help to folks who might not have gone to college, but I don't know how you equate it to the Industrial Revolution and we were the big boy standing after WW2. Germany and Japan were basically pummeled and we "occupied" them for a period after the war. Germany was split in two and was half commie for 50 years or more. Great Britain had to rebuild. France as well. We were in the drivers seat. Then got in arms race with the Soviets.
Last edited:
Not sure where you are getting information about mind altering drugs. That was not my experience. I retired in January 2009 and things do change. I do find that statement hard to believe. The industrial revolution certainly had a positive impact. I’m suggesting the GI Bill provided more people with the tools to grow our economy exponentially and it continues today! We did not have a large middle class until then. The GI Bill has allowed common folk the opportunities to learn and grow that was not available until then.
Common folk went to college before 1950. I'm not sure where you are getting this info that the Ivy League was the only higher educational option prior to the G.I. Bill. America was not Britian.
Also, the idea that there was not a large middle class prior to the post-war boom is also incorrect.
Also, the idea that there was not a large middle class prior to the post-war boom is also incorrect.
Never said the Ivy League was the only higher educational option prior to the G.I. Bill. Please do not put words in my mouth. I stand by my comment that Higher education, prior to the bill, was predominately available to the upper class. After the Bill, other programs were developed to help non-vets with limited resources to acquire a higher education, i.e., student loans, promise scholarship, pell grants, etc. Again, researchers and journalist have well documented the impact of the G.I. Bill on increasing the middle class and it's impact on creating more educational opportunities for everyone. Sorry for being such a pain for your point of view!
The middle class is shrinking today and we can thank conservative politicians that do not want to spend money on infrastructure, education, health insurance, or anything that might help those with limited resources. We are the richest and best country in the world and can do better.
Only 2.2 million WWII veterans used the GI Bill to go to college. The vast majority that took advantage of it, 5.6 million, used it for trade school.
wow, you are not biased. Game on then. You sound like a typical government bureaucrat and clock puncher.
By the way, the nimrod Democrats led by Schumer and Pelosi don't want to sign an infrastructure bill either. They just want to still cry about Russia. So, move on, from there. How long did Democrats control things and the VA was still a pile of steaming red dung tape.
You can't be serious that it is all conservatives fault? Good Lord.
^^No ideology with this one, huh?^^
SHHHHHHH. Pointing out market factors and where money/wealth actually comes from is "ideological".
I consider trade school to be higher education. And of course, all those engineers needed trades people to make what they designed.
I would consider the GI Bill a wonderful additive to America's growth or a reciprocal effect of WW2, but to say it build the country after WW2 is a stretch. I would say that it is one of the good things that happened because of the war. But, America was the biggest military might left unscathed in its homeland after the war. But, we were on our way to being the super power before the war. We essentially had little competition after the war and could do things like the GI Bill. Other countries were picking themselves up and putting the pieces back together, literally.
Don’t take it so personal. I am stating an opinion and do not expect most on this board to agree with me. Your comments about “bureaucrats & clock punchers” gives you away! I enjoyed my work, found it rewarding, and count it as a great blessing in my life. Most of the folks I worked with were dedicated and loyal to the veterans we served. Your comments cannot alter that.
