Policies to end the Depression: Hoover vs. Roosevelt

Authors Avatar

Policies to end the Depression:

Hoover vs. Roosevelt

By Carina Uehr

"T

his campaign is more than a contest between two men. It is more than a contest between two parties. It is a contest between two philosophies of government."    – H. Hoover

W

hen Wall Street crashed in 1929, it spelled the end of a decade of excess. In the 10 years preceding this dramatic event, life (for the middle class upwards at least) had been good. Businesses were booming, and new industries were growing rapidly at a time when consumer confidence was sky-high.

When the Stock market crashed on the 24th October 1929, consumer confidence slumped. No-one wanted to spend money anymore, choosing instead to horde it in wait for better times. Even before the Crash, businesses had found that no-one would buy their goods anymore, because everyone who could afford them already had them! Faced with massive losses, bosses cut down production and laid off workers. This massive lay-off of workers caused a huge raise in unemployment which steadily increased until, in 1933, 1 in 4 workers was without a job. Within 5 years, the illusion of wealth and happiness had been cruelly shattered, and was replaced by a general feeling of hopelessness and despair, which named one of the darkest chapters in American history: the great Depression.

The two Presidents in power during this time, Herbert Hoover (1919-1933) and Franklin D. Roosevelt (1933 -1945), had very different ideas of how this crisis should be handled. By comparing and contrasting their responses to the problems created by the Great Depression, we can evaluate the impact of their policies and their success in dealing with these problems.

T

o come to understand why Hoover and Roosevelt had such completely different attitudes and ideas in dealing with the Great Depression, we must first examine their backgrounds and personalities.

Herbert Hoover was a strong believer in ‘Rugged Individualism’, and believed that people should help themselves and not rely on others for their welfare. His government had adopted his predecessor’s ‘laissez-faire’ policies, which said that “…the sole function government is to bring about a condition of affaires favourable to the beneficial development of private enterprise.”

Yet what made Hoover believe in this government philosophy? To answer this question, we must look into his background before coming to power.

Hoover was orphaned at 8 years of age, and lived in poverty with an uncle until he was 17. His uncle had taught him to work hard for what he wanted, to have guts and determination, and to always stick to his principles, no matter how hard it got.

Hoover climbed the social ladder under almost entirely his own steam, and was himself living proof that ‘Rugged Individualism’ worked. He worked in Europe after the First World War, rebuilding war-torn countries and seeing the poverty and destitution of the people, and came to believe that a ‘totalitarian’ system of government was to blame for these problems. America, he said, had become a great nation because its people worked hard for their own goals and that the government should not interfere with what should be done by the people themselves.

Franklin D. Roosevelt’s background contrasts completely with that of Herbert Hoover’s. Roosevelt was born into a rich New York family, and had everything he could wish for as a child: toys, a pony, and even a sailboat. He never knew hunger or poverty or failure and everything he tried he was successful in. He was a confident and dashing young man, who never had to work a day in his life.

However, Roosevelt had one perspective that Hoover didn’t have: In 1921, he contracted Polio, and it made him a cripple. He eventually recovered, but had to wear leg braces for the rest of his life. But this event had also taught him compassion: he knew what it was like to be completely helpless, and could therefore sympathise with others in such a position.

Roosevelt possessed sophisticated speaking skills and an easy confidence, quite the opposite to Hoover’s stilted way with words and rather cold outer appearance. It was this personality difference which made him so successful in selling his policies during the 1932 election and his later presidency.

These different backgrounds greatly influenced their reactions to the Depression. Hoover had grown up with little money and hated wasting it on something untried or unproven. This is why he would later be so reluctant to put in place any public works projects or other schemes requiring government funds. Roosevelt however, had always treated money with a more casual attitude, and he had never experienced any lack of it. He as therefore not at all reluctant to spend big amounts of government funds on his various schemes, and if they didn’t work, he just scrapped them and tried something different. He was generally more impulsive and willing to try new things, always believing that “…the best government is an active one.”

Join now!

W

ith these somewhat modern and more liberal views, Roosevelt would later come to shock his more conservative party-colleagues. Yet, during his election against Hoover, Roosevelt played down his innovative ideas, and stuck to the previously accepted policies. One of these policies was known as ‘Balancing the Books’, a principle which assumed that maintaining a balanced budget (i.e. the same amount of spending as income), would create a healthy economy. Hoover firmly believed in this principle, and always applied it, even during the Depression. When the economy slumped after 1929, he cut government spending and even raised taxes ...

This is a preview of the whole essay