The New Deal: The Success Of The New Deal

1867 Words8 Pages
Franklin Delano Roosevelt introduced the New Deal in 1933 to achieve economic recovery and provide relief for the people in America. Some Historians argue the New Deal promised much, but did not achieve what it was set up to do, as unemployment was still present and the social and economic development across states remained unequal. Some contemporaries claim the New Deal did little to help cure the effects of the Depression, but instead prolonged them. Although, despite these claim, others praise the New Deal reforms for bringing social security and structural stability to the nation. However, in order to decide on whether the New Deal was able to meet its aims, one must consider the different areas which Roosevelt focused on which were; unemployment,…show more content…
It is datable on whether the New Deal was effective in doing so. Venn argues the New Deal was successful in regulating the banks to help recover the economy, as in 1933 when Banks reopened ‘deposits exceeded withdrawals’ thus proving the success of this New Deal measure. This can be further supported by the fact that within two weeks of banks reopening, Americans deposited more than half of the currency that had been stashed away, before the closing of banks. Also the reform of banks offered stability as throughout the 1920s, ‘more than five hundred banks failed per year … and less than ten banks per year after 1933.’ This suggests that Roosevelt’s New Deal was able to provide structural stability, but also meant that Roosevelt had regained America’s confidence in the economy, as the fear of losing money was no longer present. An example of this would be that by 1933 about 50% of the nation’s banks, holding nearly 90% of the country’s total resources, were judged safe and allowed to reopen. Therefore it can be argued that the New Deal was successful in regulating banks and ultimately recovering the economy as now people had reinstalled their faith in the banks, thus achieving its aim in creating structural stability for the nation through the reforming of…show more content…
Some Historians argue that the New Deal policies had little impact on the nation as a whole. However Powell argues that ‘the largest share of New Deal spending and loan programs went to political “swing” states in the West and East - where incomes were at least 60% higher than in the South.’ This suggests that perhaps Roosevelt’s New Deal policies were only to gain the support of the people, since the south was poorer, but FDR saw no point in giving much money to the South because he already had the support of voters. This also presents the view that the New Deal was unsuccessful in developing the nation since the North was more prosperous with higher wages than the south. However this can be over looked because the GDP in 1933 was 56.4 billion and this increased to 91.9 by 1937, followed by 101.4 billion by 1940. The GDP increased by 35.5 billion in the space of four years , thus leading to the assumption that the New Deal policies were effective and Roosevelt would have been able to fulfil his aim of economic recovery. Therefore , it can be said , on the whole the New Deal was able to successfully develop the nation because the majority of the Nation , despite the south being poorer , the GDP figures suggest that by 1937 , Roosevelt had achieved his aim of gaining economic recovery
Open Document