"Share Our Wealth" vs. the New Deal

[Emperor Julian]

Let's assume that somehow, Huey Long comes into power in 1933 instead of Franklin Roosevelt. Let's assume that a majority of congress is either loyal to him or able to be bullied by him, and passes the "Share Our Wealth" program:

1. No person would be allowed to accumulate a personal net worth of more than 300 times the average family fortune, which would limit personal assets to between $5 million and $8 million. A graduated capital levy tax would be assessed on all persons with a net worth exceeding $1 million.
2. Annual incomes would be limited to $1 million and inheritances would be capped at $5 million.
3. Every family was to be furnished with a homestead allowance of not less than one-third the average family wealth of the country. Every family was to be guaranteed an annual family income of at least $2,000 to $2,500, or not less than one-third of the average annual family income in the United States. Yearly income, however, cannot exceed more than 300 times the size of the average family income.
4. An old-age pension would be made available for all persons over 60.
5. To balance agricultural production, the government would preserve/store surplus goods, abolishing the practice of destroying surplus food and other necessities due to lack of purchasing power.
6. Veterans would be paid what they were owed (a pension and healthcare benefits).
7. Free education and training for all students to have equal opportunities in all schools, colleges, universities, and other institutions for training in the professions and vocations of life.
8. The raising of revenue and taxes for the support of this program was to come from the reduction of swollen fortunes from the top, as well as for the support of public works to give employment whenever there may be any slackening necessary in private enterprise.

How well would such a radical program have worked in the Great Depression?

 

[LHB]

Before getting to the implementation part just getting that through Congress would have likely pushed a lot of big industrial titans to seriously consider a fascist coup against the President. A program like that would have been denounced as socialism in even more strident tones than Roosevelt's New Deal was.

 

[CELTICEMPIRE]

I could see it having some positive affects for a few years, but prove to be disastrous in the long run.

 

[ToreroLoco]

Before getting to the implementation part just getting that through Congress would have likely pushed a lot of big industrial titans to seriously consider a fascist coup against the President. A program like that would have been denounced as socialism in even more strident tones than Roosevelt's New Deal was.

I'm agreeing with this.

 

[Anaxagoras]

How well would such a radical program have worked in the Great Depression?

It would not have worked at all, for it was hopelessly impractical and would have encountered violent resistance. And even if it had been implemented, almost all of it would have been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

 

[Ariosto]

I'm agreeing with this.

I'm agreeing with his agreeing of that.

Long did advocate for the "Share Our Wealth" in some form, but with far more moderation than what is displayed there, especially in regards to taxation; essentially it was to be nothing more than red meat for the masses so that he could easily attain the public support necessary for a run for the Presidency.
​

 

[Tallest Skil]

How well would such a radical program have worked in the Great Depression?

None of this is constitutional. It wouldn't have happened.

 

[LHB]

None of this is constitutional. It wouldn't have happened.

To add fuel to the fire what if Long tries to pull a Jackson and tells the Supreme Court to go do something physically impossible with itself?

 

[ToreroLoco]

To add fuel to the fire what if Long tries to pull a Jackson and tells the Supreme Court to go do something physically impossible with itself?

Business Plot?

 

[d32123]

Yeah even if Long was able to get elected (difficult) and elected on such a platform at that, the ruling business interests and by extension, Congress, and failing that, the Supreme Court, would have prevented most of this from being implemented.

 

[emperorharry86]

Perhaps Long could have packed the Court by getting a Congress that would impeach Supreme Court justices that he didn't like?

 

[Super_Cool]

Perhaps Long could have packed the Court by getting a Congress that would impeach Supreme Court justices that he didn't like?

Many of FDR's supporters couldn't get on board with a court packing plan. Huey Long is going to be a lot more controversial than FDR, so support for going after the court will be even smaller.

I concur that his entire platform would be unconstitutional. We may even be able to stop the SCOTUS switch on economic regulation if Long tries to overreach.

 

[CELTICEMPIRE]

I could imagine Long trying to become an autocrat.

 

[Vingilótë]

Perhaps Long could have packed the Court by getting a Congress that would impeach Supreme Court justices that he didn't like?

When FDR tried that, it blew up in his face. If Long tries to do the same for a plan which is unconstitutional and insane, well, guess.

 

[Emperor Julian]

OK, yeah it would never happen without Long toppling the government, but if Share Our Wealth was enacted, through ASB means if needed, would it help the economy more or less than the New Deal?

 

[Kome]

Im not exactly sure if the mathematics for it works out in the first place. And it would definitely be unsustainable in the long term (probably even in the short run). Thats not even going into the fraud and tax avoidance.

 

[Anaxagoras]

OK, yeah it would never happen without Long toppling the government, but if Share Our Wealth was enacted, through ASB means if needed, would it help the economy more or less than the New Deal?

Much, much less. The economy would basically collapse because the level of taxation needed to finance even a portion of what is promised would bring economic activity to a virtually halt, cause a flight of capital to other countries, make banks extremely reluctant to issue new business loans, and essentially bring everything crashing to the ground.

 

[John Masaki]

Does anyone think that at the very least, #2 and #7 can be implemented? Maybe #7 alone? It'll still mean higher taxes, but I'm one of those weird people who believe that a worthy education is a right that should not be infringed for any reason.

 

[Vingilótë]

Does anyone think that at the very least, #2 and #7 can be implemented? Maybe #7 alone? It'll still mean higher taxes, but I'm one of those weird people who believe that a worthy education is a right that should not be infringed for any reason.

Do you mean 7? 7 is the one that has to do with education, 8 is more a general outline of the whole program.

IMO, 4-7 are actually eminently reasonable, and moreover, don't require causing every millionaire to leave the country or invest in rare antiques or other valuable items. For that matter, 3, if implemented as a sort of unemployment benefit, also doesn't strike me as unreasonable.

The rest, though, is basically impossible to implement as described. That's not to say that people with swollen incomes shouldn't be taxed, and heavily; but, look at Cyprus to see why it would be a drastic failure if implemented as Long described it.

 

[phx1138]

I don't see a problem with 4-7.

I'm also thinking steep taxes on the wealthy, & on estates, aren't out of the question: recall, income tax was 90% before the '30s were over.