text:
Economics magazines
The U.S. Economy: Historical Overview
Chapter 1: The U.S. Economy: Historical Overview
Defining the U.S. Economy
It is not what we have that will make us a great nation; it is the way in which we use it.
—Theodore Roosevelt, 1886
The workings of the U.S. economy are complex and often mysterious, even to economists. At its simplest, the economy runs on three major sectors: consumers, businesses, and government. (See Figure 1.1.) Consumers earn money and exchange much of it for goods and services from businesses. These businesses use the money to produce more goods and services and to pay wages to their employees. Both consumers and businesses fund the government sector, which spends and transfers money back into the system. The banking system plays a crucial role in the economy by providing the means for all sectors to save and borrow money. Finally, there are the stock markets, which allow consumers to invest their money in the nation's businesses—an enterprise that further fuels economic growth for all sectors. Thus, the U.S. economy is a circular system based on interdependent relationships in which massive amounts of money change hands. The historical developments that produced this system are important to understand, because they provide key information about what has made the U.S. economy such a powerful force in the world.
The term market economy describes an economy in which the forces of supply and demand dictate the way in which goods and resources are allocated and what prices will be set. The opposite of a market economy is a planned economy, in which the government determines what will be produced and what prices will be charged. In a market economy, producers anticipate what products the market will be interested in and at what price, and they make decisions about what products they will bring to market and how these products will be produced and priced. Market economies foster competition among businesses, which typically leads to lower prices and is generally considered beneficial for both workers and consumers. By contrast, a planned economy is directed by a central government that has a far greater degree of influence over prices and production, as well as a tighter regulation of industries and manufacturing procedures. The United States has a mixed economy, which combines aspects of a market economy with some central planning and control to create a system with a high degree of market freedom along with regulatory agencies and social programs that promote the public welfare.
This mixed economy did not develop overnight. It has evolved over more than two centuries and has been shaped by American experiences at various times with hardship, war, peace, and prosperity.
Colonial Times
When European colonists first came to the New World, they found a vast expanse of land inhabited by Native Americans. Many of the first colonies were business ventures called charter companies that were financed by wealthy English businessmen and landowners. The colonies were granted limited economic and political rights by the king of England. After profits proved to be disappointing, many of the investors turned over the companies to the colonists themselves. These actions were to have far-reaching consequences on the shape of the United States. Christopher Conte and Albert R. Karr note in The U.S. Economy: A Brief History (2007, http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/oecon/chap3.htm) that "the colonists were left to build their own lives, their own communities, and their own economy."
At first, the colonists were preoccupied with merely surviving. Eventually, they engaged in commerce with Europe by exploiting the natural resources of their new homeland. The main agricultural products of the colonies were tobacco, wheat, rye, barley, rice, and indigo plant.
Other important exports were animal furs, products from fish and whales, and timber. Shipbuilding became a major industry in New England.
Political and Industrial Revolution
Frustrated with the political and economic interference of England, the colonists banded together to forge a new nation: the United States of America. The push for independence from Britain, which culminated in the Revolutionary War (1775–1783), was driven by economic and political motivations, including the desire for greater self-governance and tax relief.
In 1776 a book was published in England that would have long-reaching effects on the new United States. The Scottish philosopher Adam Smith (1723–1790) wrote An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. The book was remarkable for many reasons. It discussed economic principles in a common sense, nonmathematical manner and argued that the forces of supply and demand affect prices and wages. It criticized the restrictions and regulations common in European countries, and it advocated free and open trade within and between countries and the abolishment of wage and price controls. Smith believed that an "invisible hand" was guiding workers seeking to better their private finances, which in turn helped nations achieve prosperity. In other words, people who work hard for their own gain unconsciously contribute to national wealth. The principles of a competitive marketplace with little government interference were adopted by the new United States and dominated the nation's economic policy for more than a century.
During the late 1700s Britain and the newly formed United States underwent a major social and economic change from agriculture to industry. The Industrial Revolution saw the introduction of the steam engine, the cotton gin, and other machines capable of increasing production while decreasing human labor. Farming, in particular, became much less labor intensive, freeing up people to pursue other forms of employment. Over the next century the United States changed from an agrarian-based nation to one in which the majority of income was generated by manufacturing, trade, and business providing services to consumers. (See Figure 1.2.)
The 1800s: Expansion and Civil War
The 1800s were a period of enormous growth for the United States in terms of territory, population, and economic might. The Northeast developed thriving industries, and cities swelled with hundreds of thousands of European immigrants. Even though the South remained largely rural and agricultural, mechanical innovations, such as the cotton gin, changed the region's focus. Cotton became a major crop and was exported to textile mills in the North and overseas. Much of the economic success of the South was based on the use of slave labor.
Deep divisions arose between factions in the North and South on the morality of slavery and associated
political and economic issues, which led to the devastating American Civil War in 1861. By the time the war ended in 1865, the factories of the Northeast had become extremely important in fueling the U.S. economy.
In 1873 the American author Mark Twain (1835–1910) cowrote with his neighbor Charles Dudley Warner (1829–1900) the novel The Gilded Age, which describes an American society in which unscrupulous businessmen and corrupt politicians pursue quick fortunes at the expense of the common people. Indeed, the decades following the Civil War were characterized by scandals involving high-level politicians making money from crooked business deals and by an unprecedented boom in business. The resulting social atmosphere was one of decadence among the upper classes contrasted with poverty and labor unrest among the lower classes.
The U.S. government had a hands-off approach to business regulation, a tactic described by the French term laissez faire (leave alone or "do as you please"). It was generally believed that the government should not interfere in economic affairs but should instead allow supply and demand and competition to operate unfettered, resulting in a free market.
The gilded age is notable for a growth in corporations. A corporation is a legally defined entity that may receive financial support from many investors but is treated as an individual under the law. A corporation is granted a state charter including specific rights, privileges, and liabilities. This type of business organization became popular in the late 1800s. It allowed people to invest in businesses without taking on all the responsibilities and risks of being a business owner. State charters limited the liability of individual investors, who were paid dividends in proportion to their share of investment in the corporation.
Some corporations grew through mergers or by buying out the companies of their competitors. Then they developed a business structure called a trust, in which the component companies were managed by a small group of people called a board of trustees. These corporations controlled nearly all the business in their respective industries, a condition known as monopolization. The public feared that trusts squelched competition that helped keep prices in check. In 1890 Congress passed the Sherman Antitrust Act. Its stated purpose was "to protect trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies." However, due to court challenges, the law was not successfully applied until the early 1900s.
Panics and Depressions
In economic terms a panic is a widespread occurrence of public anxiety about financial affairs. People lose confidence in banks and investments and want to hold onto their money instead of spending it. This can lead to a severe downturn, or depression, in the economic condition of a nation. The U.S. economy suffered from panics and depressions even during the booming growth of the 1800s and early 1900s. Economists argue about the exact definitions of panics and depressions, but in general it is agreed that panics and/or economic downturns occurred in the United States in 1819, 1837, 1857, 1869, 1873, 1893, and 1907.
The crises were triggered by a variety of factors. Common problems included too much borrowing and speculation by investors and poor oversight of banks by the federal government. Speculation is the buying of assets on the hope that they will greatly increase in value in the future. During the 1800s many speculators borrowed money from banks to buy land. Huge demand caused land prices to increase dramatically, often above what the land was actually worth in the market. Poorly regulated banks extended too much credit to speculators and to each other. When a large bank failed, there was a domino effect through the industry, which caused other banks and businesses to fail.
A panic or depression results in a downward economic spiral in which individuals and businesses are afraid to make new investments. People rush to pull their money from banks. As panic spreads, banks demand that borrowers pay back money, but borrowers may lack the funds to do so. Consumers are reluctant to spend money, which negatively affects businesses. Demand for products goes down, and prices must be lowered to move merchandise off of shelves. This means less profit for business owners. Businesses lay off employees to cut costs and do not hire new employees. As more people become unemployed or fearful about their jobs, there is even less spending in the marketplace, which leads to more business cutbacks and so forth. The cycle continues until some compelling change takes place to nudge the economy back into a positive direction.
The Twentieth Century Begins
The early twentieth century was a time of social and political change in the United States. Public disgust at the corruption and greed of the gilded age encouraged the movement called progressivism. Progressives promoted civic responsibility, worker's rights, consumer protection, political and tax reform, "trust busting," and strong government action to achieve social improvements. The progressive era greatly affected the U.S. economy because of its focus on improving working conditions for average Americans. Successes for the progressives included child labor restrictions, improved working conditions in factories, compensation funds for injured workers, a growth surge in labor unions, federal regulation of food and drug industries, and the formation of the Federal Trade Commission to oversee business practices.
Some people viewed the progressive movement as an attack on capitalism and a prelude to socialism. The U.S. economy was first described as "capitalist" by the German economist Karl Marx (1818–1883), who used the term to describe an economy in which a small group of people control the capital, or money available for investment, and, by extension, control the power within the economy. A common criticism of capitalism was that it favored profits over the well-being of workers. Marx advocated a socialist system in which wealth and property were not held by a few individuals but were equally distributed among all workers under a heavily planned economy. The socialist movement gained some momentum during the progressive era, thanks in large part to its ties to organized labor. In The Tyranny of Change: America in the Progressive Era, 1890–1920 (2000), John Whiteclay Chambers II states that during the 1912 presidential election the socialist candidate Eugene V. Debs (1885–1926) garnered more than nine hundred thousand votes—around 6% of the popular vote. However, socialism soon faded as a serious challenge to U.S. capitalism.
Despite its laissez-faire attitude, the federal government took two actions in 1913 that were to have long-lasting effects on the U.S. economy:
Establishment of the Federal Reserve System to serve as the nation's central bank, furnish currency, and supervise banking
Ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution authorizing the collection of income taxes
World War I and Inflation
World War I erupted in Europe in August 1914. The United States entered the conflict in April 1917 and was engaged until the war ended in November 1918. Even though the nation spent only nineteen months at war, the U.S. economy underwent major changes during this period.
It is sometimes said that "war is good for the economy" because, during a major war, the federal government spends large amounts of money on weapons and machinery through contracts with private industries. These industries hire more employees, which reduces unemployment and puts more money into the hands of consumers to spend in the marketplace. This benefits other businesses not directly involved in the war effort. On the surface, these economic effects appear positive. However, major wars almost always result in high inflation rates.
Inflation is an economic condition in which the purchasing power of money goes down because of price increases in goods and services. For example, if a nation experiences an inflation rate of 3% in a year, an item that cost $1.00 at the beginning of the year will cost $1.03 at the end of the year.Inflation causes the"value"of a dollar to go down over the course of the year. In general, small increases in inflation occur over time in a healthy growing economy, because demand slightly outpaces supply. Economists consider an inflation rate of 3% or less a year to be tolerable. During a major war the supply and demand ratio becomes distorted. This occurs when the nation produces huge amounts of war goods and far fewer consumer goods, such as food, clothing, and cars. This lack of supply and anxiety about the future drive up the prices of consumer goods, making it difficult for people to afford things they need or want.
During World War I the federal government intervened in private industry to support war needs and exert some control over supply and demand dynamics. Agencies were created to oversee the production of war goods, food, fuel, and nonmilitary ships. Even though the government tried to impose some level of price control in the food and fuel industries, inflation still occurred. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970, Bicentennial Edition, Part 1 (September 1975, http://www2.census.gov/prod2/statcomp/documents/CT1970p1-07.pdf), the prices for many consumer goods nearly doubled between 1915 and 1920. Figure 1.3 shows the average annual inflation rate from 1914 through 1924. The inflation rate was unusually high from 1916 through 1920, peaking at 18% in 1918. War-time inflation was particularly hard on nonworking citizens, such as the elderly and sick, because there were no large government programs in place at that time to assist needy people.
A lasting legacy of World War I was the assumption of large amounts of debt by the federal government to fund the war effort. Figure 1.4 shows the enormous differences that occurred between government revenues (receipts) and spending during the war years. In 1919 government spending peaked at nearly $18.5 billion; revenues for that year were just over $5 billion. The government made up the difference by borrowing money. One method used was the selling of Liberty bonds. Bonds are a type of financial asset—an IOU that promises to pay back at some future date the original purchase price plus interest.
The Roaring Twenties
The Roaring Twenties began with a whimper; there was a severe economic downturn in 1921. However, this crisis was followed by several years of robust economic growth. Mass production and the availability of electricity led to huge consumer demand for household appliances. Installment plans became a popular means for middle-class Americans to purchase expensive long-lasting (durable) goods such as refrigerators, washing machines, and automobiles.
Americans also began spending more money on entertainment. They bought radios and went in large numbers to see motion pictures and baseball games. For many people, the automobile became a necessity, rather than a luxury. Booming car sales boosted the petroleum and housing markets and allowed city dwellers to move to the suburbs.
The prosperity of the 1920s was not shared by all Americans. During World War I demand for agricultural goods had skyrocketed, particularly in Europe. Overoptimistic farmers borrowed heavily to pay for tractors and other farm equipment, only to see food prices plummet during the 1920s when supply outpaced demand. Financial problems in the agricultural industry directly affected many Americans. In addition, banks in rural areas were stressed by farmers who were unable to pay back loans. The agricultural crisis was accompanied by downturns in the coal mining and railroad industries that affected many workers.
In the late 1920s the stock market became a major factor in the U.S. economy. Investors were richly rewarded, as stocks increased dramatically in value. Many people took out loans from banks to pay for stock or purchased stock by "buying on margin." In this arrangement an
investor would make a small down payment (as little as 10%) on a stock purchase. The remainder of the balance would be paid (in theory) by the future increase in the stock value. Buying on margin was widely practiced by optimistic investors of the time. In "The Crash and the Great Depression" (2000, http://us.history.wisc.edu/hist102/lectures/textonly/lecture18.html), Stanley K. Schultz and William P. Tishler of the University of Wisconsin state that "by 1929, much of the money that was invested in the stock market did not actually exist."
Black Tuesday—October 29, 1929
On October 29, 1929, the stock market crashed. For months, President Herbert Hoover (1874–1964) and other influential people had warned that there was too much speculation in the stock market and that stock prices were higher than the actual worth of the companies. In the fall of 1929 investors began to get nervous. On October 24, 1929, there was a selling frenzy as people tried to get rid of stocks they thought might be overvalued. The day was dubbed "Black Thursday." The following day the market rebounded somewhat, and stock prices climbed back upward. However, this recovery was short lived.
On Tuesday, October 29, 1929, panic selling took place all day. Stock values dropped dramatically. The drawback to buying on margin was that if a stock value went down by a certain amount, the lender would make a margin call by asking the buyer for more cash up front. If the margin buyer could not pay, the lender sold the stock to recoup the money. As "Black Tuesday" progressed, desperate margin buyers paid lenders all their cash in savings in hopes of saving their stock for the expected recovery, but no recovery came. As stock values fell further, lenders demanded more money. By the end of the day, many margin buyers had lost their life savings and their stock. Those who managed to hold on to their stock found it was worth only a fraction of its former value.
According to Harold Bierman Jr. of Cornell University, in "The 1929 Stock Market Crash" (March 26, 2008, http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/Bierman.Crash), the U.S. stock market lost 90% of its value between 1929 and 1932.
The U.S. economy suffered a devastating downturn following the stock market crash. The depression was so deep and lasted so long—more than a decade—that it is called the Great Depression.
Historically, economic depressions had been short downturns with limited consequences. They were temporary dips in an overall trend of American prosperity. The Great Depression was a completely different experience. It brought long-term unemployment and hardship to millions of people. The unemployment rate soared from 3.2% in 1929 to nearly 25% in 1933. (See Figure 1.5.) It remained more than 10% through the end of the 1930s. The public lost confidence in the stock market, the banking system, and big business.
Like all previous depressions, this one included a downward cycle in which businesses reduced spending and production and laid off employees. Unemployed workers and those fearful of losing their jobs cut back on spending, which forced businesses to lay off more people. The economy underwent "deflation"—a condition where a lack of money among consumers depresses demand and pushes prices downward. Lower prices for agricultural and industrial goods hurt farmers and businesses, particularly those with high debt. Consumers also had assumed high levels of debt during the 1920s.
The Great Depression was aggravated by a crisis in the banking industry. Some banks had invested heavily in the stock market using their depositors' money or loaned large amounts of money to stock market investors. These banks failed after the crash, and the depositors lost their savings. Fear of further failures caused "bank runs," in which large numbers of depositors rushed to withdraw their money at the same time. This caused more bank failures, which perpetuated the cycle. In addition, some economists believe that the banking market became oversaturated during the 1920s with underfunded and loosely regulated banks that loaned money too easily. These institutions were already financially troubled before the crash and could not survive the stress.
The United States' Great Depression was felt world-wide, particularly in other industrialized countries. By the 1920s the United States played a major role in world commerce by exporting and importing large amounts of goods and investing money in foreign businesses. A prolonged downturn in U.S. production, spending, and investing, combined with the banking crisis, had international consequences. Europe, in particular, suffered financially as it struggled to recover from the devastation of World War I.
When the Great Depression began, the laissez-faire attitude still dominated political opinion. Some economists, including Andrew W. Mellon (1855–1937), who served as the secretary of the treasury from 1921 through 1932, advised President Hoover not to interfere. Mellon took the traditional viewpoint that supply and demand factors would eventually equilibrate and that the economy would recover on its own. Hoover was not convinced. He tried a variety of tax adjustments, asked industry not to cut wages, and pushed for public works projects. However, the depression only deepened.
By 1932 Americans were ready for a change in leadership. Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882–1945), the governor of New York, promised "a new deal" for the nation. He was elected in a landslide victory and developed a government that aggressively acted in economic affairs. The New Deal included a wide variety of programs intended to bring relief to suffering Americans, revive farming and business, and reform the stock market and banking industry. After more than seventy years, economists still argue about whether the New Deal was actually "a good deal" for the nation. They all agree, however, that it was a turning point in U.S. economic history.
Some New Deal programs did not survive court challenges. The National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933 encouraged companies within industries to form alliances and set prices and wages. The companies that participated were exempt from antitrust laws that ordinarily would have forbidden such collusion. In 1935 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the law unconstitutional. The Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933 paid farmers to reduce production. It was thought that lower supply would raise prices and improve the living conditions of farmers. In 1936 the Supreme Court invalidated parts of the act. However, the payment of farm subsidies became a permanent component of U.S. economic policy.
Other legacies of the New Deal era include:
Federal Securities Act (1933)—regulated the selling of investment instruments (such as stock) to ensure that buyers are better educated about their purchases and to prevent fraudulent practices
Glass-Steagall Banking Act (1933)—separated the commercial and investment banking industries and established the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to safeguard depositors' money
Securities Exchange Act (1934)—regulated the stock exchanges and created the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
National Labor Relations Act (1935)—guaranteed the right of employees in most private industries to organize, form labor unions, and bargain collectively with their employers; it also established the National Labor Relations Board
Social Security Act (1935)—established a program to provide federal benefits to the elderly and assist the states in providing for "aged persons, blind persons, dependent and crippled children, maternal and child welfare, public health, and the administration of their unemployment compensation laws"
Government employment programs under the Public Works Administration, the Works Project Administration, and the Civilian Conservation Corps put people to work building roads, dams, bridges, airfields, and post offices and developing national parks for tourism. Robert J. Samuelson explains in "Great Depression" (2002, http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/GreatDepression.html#biography) that as many as ten to twelve million Americans were employed in these programs at various times during the 1930s.
Perhaps the greatest legacy of Roosevelt's New Deal was the new role of the federal government as a manipulator of economic forces and a provider of benefits to the needy. This change in U.S. policy was seen as a wise and compassionate move by some people and as a dangerous shift toward socialism by others. In U.S. history the New Deal is considered the birth of "big government."
By 1940 the unemployment rate was 14.9%. (See Figure 1.5.) Even though the rate was down from a peak of 25% in 1933, it was still high by historical standards. Nearly a decade of New Deal programs had softened the hardship suffered by many Americans, but had not boosted the country out of the Great Depression. It was going to take a war to accomplish this task.
Even though the United States officially entered World War II in 1941, it had been gearing up its industries for war for more than a year. This experience at mobilization (converting civilian industries to produce military goods) proved to be invaluable. The federal government established a host of agencies to oversee wartime production, labor relations, and prices. Efforts were made to avoid the huge inflation increase that had occurred during World War I. Rationing (tight controls over how much of an item a person can use or consume in a certain amount of time) was instituted on some goods to prevent dramatic price increases. Overall, these efforts were successful. Figure 1.6 shows the annual rates of inflation experienced in the United States between 1940 and 1950. Inflation
spiked during the early years of the war and immediately after but was not consistently high over the decade.
Businesses rushed to increase production and hire workers to produce the goods needed for the war effort. Unemployment dropped dramatically and wages went up, particularly for workers in low-skilled factory jobs. Laborers found themselves in high demand and joined labor unions in record numbers to consolidate their power and seek better working conditions.
World War II was an expensive endeavor for the United States. However, it was believed that the stakes were so high that the war had to be won at any cost. According to Figure 1.7, government spending during the war far outpaced revenues. By 1945 the government was spending around $90 billion per year and taking in revenues around half this amount. Once again, the difference was made up by borrowing.
Keynesian Economics
The Great Depression shook many peoples' beliefs in the laissez-faire approach to economics advocated by Smith in the eighteenth century. During the 1930s and 1940s different approaches to capitalism began to receive serious attention. One of the most famous economists of the time was John Maynard Keynes (1883–1946). Keynes was an English expert in the application of economic theory to real-world problems. He published several influential books, including The Economic Consequences of the Peace (1919) and the General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money (1936). In the latter book, Keynes advocated strong government intervention in the economy as a remedy for the ongoing economic depression.
Politicians of the 1930s were not completely convinced by Keynes's arguments, particularly in regards to government spending. Maintaining a balanced federal budget was considered so sacred that the governments of Hoover and Roosevelt were reluctant to veer far from that precedent. However, following World War II it appeared obvious that huge government spending had helped fuel recovery from the Great Depression. Keynes's theories on capitalism, unemployment, and business cycles became highly regarded, and he is credited with inventing macroeconomics. This is a "big picture" approach that measures
broad trends in an economy, such as employment and inflation, and the way these trends interact. In contrast, microeconomics analyzes the economy on a smaller scale—for example, by studying the supply and demand factors at work in individual markets or industrial segments.
Keynesian economics became the operating principle of the U.S. government in the post–World War II era. Even though Keynes had his critics, and his methods have been revised over time, he is considered by many to be the father of the mixed economy system used in the United States to this day.
The National Income and Product Accounts
One innovation of the 1940s was the National Income and Product Accounts (NIPAs), which are compilations of national economic data. Before that time there was a lack of comprehensive macroeconomic data on the nation's inputs and outputs, such as labor and production of goods and services. This problem became apparent during the Great Depression, when the Hoover and Roosevelt administrations were forced to make decisions based on fragmented and incomplete data on the nation's financial condition. As a result, the federal government asked researchers at the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) at the University of New York to begin estimating national income (e.g., wages, profits, and rent). The NBER had been founded in 1920 as a private nonprofit organization dedicated to economic research.
During World War II the federal government began compiling another macroeconomic measure called the gross national product (GNP). The GNP is the amount in dollars of the value of final goods and services produced by Americans over a particular time period. For example, the Census Bureau reports in Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970 that the GNP in 1945 was nearly $212 billion. The GNP is calculated by summing consumer and government spending, business and residential investments, and the net value of U.S. exports (exports minus imports).
At first, GNP estimates were made annually. Eventually, they were calculated on a quarterly basis. The GNP provides
a valuable tool for tracking national productivity over time. By the end of the 1940s an entire set of NIPAs had been developed to report macroeconomic data on the state of the U.S. economy.
A Postwar Spending Spree
Following World War II many U.S. industries demobilized from producing military goods and returned to producing consumer goods. Well-paid workers who had been frustrated by wartime shortages were ready to spend money. Returning soldiers received government incentives to buy houses and start businesses. Postwar euphoria drove a spending spree and a baby boom.
New industries in aviation and electronics arose after World War II. Many existing industries underwent consolidation and growth as corporations merged into giant conglomerates. Figure 1.8 shows the national income produced by the business sector for 1953 to 1957. Manufacturing accounted for 31% of the national income during this period.
The 1950s also experienced a boom in business franchises. In this arrangement an individual could purchase permission from a company in one geographic area to sell the company's products or services in another area. Franchising proved to be an extremely effective means of spreading brand recognition and was widely practiced in the surging fast-food industry. In 1955 Des Plaines, Illinois, became the site of the first McDonald's franchise, after the businessman Ray Kroc (1902–1984) became a franchisee for the McDonald brothers, who owned a small chain of restaurants in California. By 1959 there were more than one hundred McDonald's franchises around the country. Over the next decade franchising was practiced in a number of other businesses, many of which grew into major corporations.
Dwight D. Eisenhower (1890–1969) was president from 1953 through 1961. His administration is associated with a growing economy that experienced low inflation rates and general prosperity. However, the prosperity of the 1950s was not shared equally in American society. Once again, farmers found themselves in trouble due to overproduction. An oversupply of agricultural goods meant lower prices (and lower profits). Agriculture became increasingly an industry in which large factory farms run by corporations were able to survive, whereas many smaller farmers could not compete.
Minority populations (largely African-American) also suffered financial hardship during this era. Figure 1.9 shows the dramatic difference between the unemployment rates for whites and minorities during the postwar decades. By the mid-1950s unemployment among minorities was twice as high as it was among white workers, a disparity that lingered well into the 1960s. It was in this atmosphere that the civil rights movement gained in strength and urgency. In 1954 segregation was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. A year later, the African-American seamstress and activist Rosa Parks (1913–2005) was arrested in Alabama for refusing to move from the "white" section of a public bus. This incident spurred a bus boycott and ultimately brought Martin Luther King Jr. (1929–1968) and other leaders of the movement to national prominence.
The Cold War, Korea, and Vietnam
The United States left World War II in sound economic shape. During the war, all other industrialized nations had suffered great losses in their infrastructure, financial stability, and populations. The United States invested heavily in the postwar economies of Western Europe and Japan, hoping to instill an atmosphere conducive to peace and the spread of capitalism. U.S. barriers to foreign trade were relaxed to build new markets for U.S. exports and to allow some war-ravaged nations to make money selling goods to American consumers.
The Soviet Union had been a wartime ally of the United States, but relations became strained after the war. The Soviet Union had adopted communism following a period of revolution and civil war in the late 1910s and early 1920s. During World War II the Soviet Union "liberated" a large part of eastern Europe from Nazi occupation. Through various means the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) assumed political control over these nations. The USSR had been largely industrialized before
World War II and quickly regained its industrial capabilities. It soon took a major role in international affairs, placing it in direct conflict with the only other superpower of the time: the United States. A cold war began between the two rich and powerful nations that had completely different political, economic, and social goals for the world.
The cold war was fought mostly by politicians and diplomats. A direct and large-scale military conflict between U.S. and Soviet forces never occurred. Regardless, an expensive arms race began in which both sides produced and stockpiled large amounts of weapons as a show of force to deter a first strike by the enemy. In addition, both sides provided financial and military support to countries around the world in an attempt to influence the political leanings of those populations. Communist China joined the cold war during the 1950s and often partnered with the USSR against U.S. interests.
During the early 1950s U.S. forces became embroiled in two Asian conflicts over communism: the Korean War and the Vietnam War. The Korean War was relatively short, lasting from 1950 through 1953. The fight in Vietnam turned out to be a long and difficult one in which U.S. forces, assisted by a handful of other countries, were pitted against highly motivated forces equipped and backed by the USSR and China. The United States was engaged in the Vietnam War from 1955 until it withdrew the last of its troops in 1975, leaving South Vietnam to a communist takeover. In Outline of U.S. History (November 2005, http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/histryotln/historytln.pdf), Alonzo L. Hamby of Ohio University states that the total cost of the Vietnam War exceeded $150 billion.
In both the Korean and Vietnam wars the United States chose to fight in a limited manner without using its arsenal of nuclear weapons or engaging Chinese or Soviet troops directly for fear of sparking another world war. Full-scale mobilization of U.S. industries was not required for these wars, as it had been during World War II. Instead, a defense industry developed during the cold war to supply the U.S. military on a continuous basis with the arms and goods it needed.
Figure 1.10 shows the percentage of the national budget that was devoted to national defense between 1940 and 1970. Spending on national defense soared during World War II and then declined dramatically following the war's end. However, military spending quickly climbed again as the cold war heated up, remaining above 40% for nearly two decades.
The Birth of the Modern Fed
The nation's central bank—the Federal Reserve System—was formed in 1913 to furnish currency and supervise financial institutions. Gradually, it took on other roles that affected the amount of money circulating in the United States and the interest rates charged by banks to their customers. The Federal Reserve System consists of twelve regional banks located around the country and is overseen by a seven-member board of governors headquartered in Washington, D.C.
The Fed, as it came to be called, was designed to be as independent as possible from political pressures from the U.S. president and the Congress. This safeguard was included to prevent the Fed from having to bow to demands for short-term economic fixes requested by politicians seeking reelection. The Fed was charged with taking a big-picture, long-term approach to economic policy for the good of the nation as a whole.
Robert L. Hetzel and Ralph F. Leach explain in "After the Accord: Reminiscences on the Birth of the Modern Fed" (Economic Quarterly, vol. 87, no. 1, winter 2001), that from its inception until the early 1950s, the Fed was influenced by the policies of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, a federal agency created in 1789. During the late 1940s Fed and Treasury officials disagreed about how best to handle the large debt accumulated by the United States during World War II. This conflict and other contentious issues led to a new agreement, or accord, between the two agencies about the roles of each in the U.S. economy. This accord is considered the birth of the modern Fed, an organization that has grown to exert great power in the U.S. economy.
The chairman of the board of governors at the time of the accord was William McChesney Martin Jr. (1906–1998). Martin was a dynamic leader who maintained his post for nearly two decades. Under his leadership the Fed assumed greater control over the nation's financial policies. This control was exercised primarily by influencing interest rates on loans. Lowering interest rates encouraged borrowing, which put more money into circulation for spending or investing. However, if demand outpaced supply, price inflation became a problem. Then, the Fed would raise interest rates to make borrowing less attractive and dampen demand. Martin reportedly summed this up by saying, "You have to take away the punch bowl when the party is warming up." His policy proved to be fruitful during the prosperous decades of the 1950s and 1960s.
The 1960s: Social Upheaval and Economic Growth
The 1960s were a time of social and economic change for the United States. The decade began with the election of President John F. Kennedy (1917–1963), who promised to ensure economic growth and address growing social problems within the United States. In 1963 Kennedy's efforts were cut short by his assassination. Lyndon B. Johnson (1908–1973) took over as president and dramatically enlarged the federal government and its role in socioeconomic affairs. Johnson's administration initiated large-scale programs for the needy, including the health-care programs Medicare (for the elderly) and Medicaid (for the poor), jobs programs, federal aid to schools, and food stamps for low-income Americans. The so-called war on poverty and the escalating war in Vietnam proved to be extremely expensive. At the same time, the United States was pursuing a costly (but ultimately successful) endeavor to land astronauts on the moon before the end of the decade.
Consumer and government spending drove the nation's GNP during the 1960s. According to the article "1970: The Year of the Hangover" (Time, December 28, 1970), it grew to $977 billion by 1970. However, inflation became a problem (as it often does in a fast-growing economy) in the late 1960s. At the macroeconomic level, there was too much money in the hands of consumers, which resulted in consumer demand that was higher than supply. In Consumer Price Index (June 13, 2008,ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/cpi/cpiai.txt), the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) notes that by 1970 the inflation rate had reached 5.7%.
The nation was preoccupied with the explosive social problems of the time. During the mid- to late 1960s the country was plagued by protests against the Vietnam War and riots in blighted urban areas populated by poor African-Americans. By 1968 there were half a million U.S. troops in Vietnam. Nightly television coverage provided a bleak picture of the war's progress and helped turn public opinion against the war and President Johnson. In 1968 Johnson announced he would not seek reelection. That same year King and Robert F. Kennedy (1925–1968)—John Kennedy's brother and an aspiring presidential candidate—were assassinated.
According to the NBER, in "US Business Cycle Expansions and Contractions" (March 27, 2008, http://www.nber.org/cycles.html/), the United States left the 1960s having experienced the longest continuous stretch of positive GNP growth in history—the first quarter of 1961 through the last quarter of 1969. However, high inflation was about to become a major problem.
The 1970s: Stagflation and Energy Crises
Stagflation is a word coined during the 1970s to describe an economy suffering stagnant growth, high inflation, and high unemployment all at the same time. This combination of economic problems was unprecedented in U.S. history. Previously, high inflation had occurred when the economy was growing quickly, such as during World War II. However, high production had meant high employment levels. By contrast, economic downturns were associated with higher unemployment but lower inflation (and even deflation). These relationships had been considered natural and certain.
The 1970s were unique because both unemployment and inflation were high, by historical standards. The economist Robert Joseph Barro (1944–) invented a new term called the Misery index to describe this condition. The Misery index is computed by summing the unemployment rate and inflation rate. Figure 1.11 shows the annual Misery index calculated for 1968 through 1983. By the mid-1970s each rate exceeded 5%.
There were three presidents during the 1970s— Richard M. Nixon (1913–1994), Gerald R. Ford (1913–2006), and Jimmy Carter (1924–). Each tried a variety of measures to stem stagflation, but none was considered effective. Nixon implemented wage and price controls and increased government spending. In 1973 he resigned under threat of impeachment for his role in the Watergate scandal. Vice president Ford assumed the presidency. Economic problems continued, and in 1976 the country elected Carter as the new president. Carter had emphasized the high Misery index during his presidential campaign, but his administration was unable to turn the tide. By 1980 the Misery index had climbed to 20%. (See Figure 1.11.)
FOREIGN OIL AND COMPETITION. The United States' economic problems were aggravated by its dependence on foreign oil and competition from foreign industries. In 1973 the Middle Eastern members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries halted oil exports to the United States in retaliation for U.S. support of Israel. The oil embargo lasted five months. When shipments resumed, the price of oil had dramatically increased. Americans faced high prices, long lines, and shortages at the gas pumps. Figure 1.12 shows that the average retail price of gasoline surged from around $0.35 per gallon in 1972 to $1.35 per gallon in 1981. To save fuel, a 55-mile-per-hour (89 kph) speed limit was imposed on the nation's interstates. The federal government called on Americans to conserve energy and provided an example by not lighting the White House Christmas tree. During the late 1970s a revolution in oil-rich Iran brought a second wave of shortages to U.S. energy supplies.
The "energy crisis" of the 1970s had a ripple effect through the U.S. economy, causing the prices of other goods and services to increase. Lower profits and uncertainty about the future caused businesses to slow down and reduce their workforces. At the same time, U.S. industries in steel, automobiles, and electronics endured stiff foreign competition, particularly from Japan. Small energy-efficient Japanese cars became popular in the United States. By 1980 gasoline cost more than $1.00 per gallon, which was quadruple the price in 1970. (See Figure 1.12.) U.S. car makers struggled to compete, having always relied on consumer demand for large automobiles—which were now considered "gas guzzlers."
DEREGULATION. One of the measures that President Carter used to combat stagflation was deregulation. For decades, certain industries in the United States had been given government immunity from market supply and demand factors. The railroad, trucking, and airline industries were prime examples. Companies in these industries were guaranteed rates and routes and were allowed to operate contrary to antitrust laws. In 1978 the airline industry was deregulated. The result was that airlines began to compete with each other over fares and routes, and new companies entered the industry. Some of the large, well-established companies were unable to compete in the new environment and went out of business. However, demand increased as prices came down and flying became available to many more Americans. By 1980 deregulation had been completed or was under way for the railroad, trucking, energy, financial services, and telecommunications industries.
The 1980s: Recession and Reaganomics
In November 1980 the American people elected Ronald Reagan (1911–2004) as the new president. Inflation was at 13% that year, which was incredibly high for a peacetime economy. (See Figure 1.11.) Unemployment was at 7%, meaning that millions of people were unemployed and faced with rapidly increasing prices in the marketplace. The economic situation was dire, and drastic measures were required to turn the economy around.
SLAYING THE INFLATIONARY DRAGON. In late 1979 President Carter had appointed a new governor of the Federal Reserve, Paul A. Volcker (1927–), who promised to "slay the inflationary dragon." Volcker began by tightening the nation's money supply. This had the effect of making credit more difficult to obtain, which drove up interest rates. The government knew that rising interest rates would probably trigger a production slowdown (a recession) that would push unemployment even higher. It was a trade-off that policymakers during the previous decade had been unwilling to accept.
Volcker forged ahead with his policies, and by the early 1980s interest rates had reached historical highs. Figure 1.13 shows that the prime loan rate—the interest rate that banks charge their best customers—peaked at 21.5% in December 1980. In 1981 the average interest rate for a conventional thirty-year mortgage soared to nearly 18.5%, the highest rate ever recorded by the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, in "30-Year Conventional Mortgage Rate" (June 3, 2008, http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/data/MORTG.txt).
The lack of credit caused a business slowdown—a reduction in GNP growth (or recession). As expected,
the recession put more people out of work. Unemployment climbed at first, averaging 10% in 1982 and 1983, but then began to decline. (See Figure 1.11.) By the end of the decade it was down around 5%. According to the BLS, in Consumer Price Index, the inflation rate dropped from a high of 13.5% in 1980 to 4.8% by 1989. Even though the spike in unemployment had been painful for Americans, the inflationary dragon was finally dead.
REAGANOMICS. When Reagan took office in 1981, he brought a new approach to curing the nation's financial woes: supply-side economics. Traditionally, the government had focused on the demand side—the role of consumers in stimulating businesses to produce more. Reagan preferred economic policies that directly helped producers. In "Supply Side Economics" (2005, http://www.auburn.edu/C24johnspm/gloss/supply_side), Paul Johnson of Auburn University describes the philosophy this way: "Supply-side policy analysts focus on barriers to higher productivity— identifying ways in which the government can promote faster economic growth over the long haul by removing impediments to the supply of, and efficient use of, the factors of production."
One of the cornerstones of supply-side economics is reducing taxes so that people and businesses have more money to invest in private enterprise. Reagan enacted tax cuts through two pieces of legislation: the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 and the Tax Reform Act of 1986. The result was a much lower number of tax brackets (the various rates at which individuals are taxed based on their income), a broader tax base (wealth within a jurisdiction that is liable to taxation), and reduced tax rates on income and capital gains (the profit made from selling an investment, such as land).
At the same time, Reagan pushed for greater national defense spending as part of his "peace through strength" approach to the Soviet Union and selective cuts in social services spending. However, no cuts were made to the largest and most expensive programs within the social services budget. The combination of all these factors resulted in high federal deficits during the 1980s. In other words, the federal government was spending more than it was making each year. As shown in Figure 1.14, the federal deficits of the mid-1980s were more than twice what they had been during the mid-1970s. According to the article "U.S. Debt Past $1 Trillion" (New York Times, October 23, 1981), the national debt (the sum of all accumulated federal deficits since the nation began) reached $1 trillion in 1981.
The 1990s: Sparkling Economic Performance
The 1990s were a time of phenomenal economic growth for the United States, even amid the shadows of war and an ever-increasing federal deficit. In August 1990 the military forces of Iraq under President Saddam Hussein (1937–2006) invaded the small neighboring country of Kuwait. President George H. W. Bush (1924–) had taken office in 1989 and quickly acted to put together a coalition of international forces that successfully forced Iraq out of Kuwait. The Gulf War, as it came to be known, was short lived and would be seen as a triumphant, if incomplete, victory by allied forces. Even though his military strength was weakened, Hussein was not removed from power in Iraq. As a result, he continued to pose foreign relations problems for the United States for many years.
President Bush had been elected in large part because of his promise not to raise taxes. During his presidential campaign he famously said, "Read my lips: No new taxes." However, the promise was not one he could keep, given the economic realities of the time. During the late 1980s there had been a severe financial crisis in the savings and loan industry, which had been recently deregulated. A series of unwise loans and poor business decisions left most of the industry in shambles and necessitated a government bailout. According to Hamby, by 1993 the cost of the bailout had reached nearly $525 billion. At the same time, the government faced rapidly
rising expenditures on health-care programs for the elderly (Medicare) and the needy (Medicaid). Bush reluctantly agreed to a tax increase, a move that was politically damaging. In 1992 he lost his reelection bid to the Arkansas governor Bill Clinton (1946–), who was reelected in 1996.
Joseph Tracy, Henry Schneider, and Sewin Chan indicate in "Are Stocks Overtaking Real Estate in Household Portfolios?" (Current Issues in Economics and Finance, vol. 5, no. 5, April 1999) that, overall, the 1990s were a period of peace and prosperity for the United States. The cold war ended when the Soviet Union disintegrated into individual republics. Technological innovations, particularly in the computer industry, helped push the economy to new heights. Sterling business success led to robust investor confidence in the stock markets. Figure 1.15 shows the portion of household assets invested in real estate and corporate equity (stocks) between 1945 and 1998. Even though real estate was the preferred investment through nearly all of this period, the 1990s witnessed tremendous increases in the holdings of corporate equity by the average American. In the mid-1980s the average household had only 10% of its assets in corporate equity. By 1998 this percentage had reached nearly 30%, roughly equal to the percent held in real estate. The Dow Jones Industrial Average is a stock market index—a measure used by economists to gauge the value (and performance) of the stock of thirty large companies. Between the late 1970s and the late 1990s the index soared from around one thousand points to eleven thousand points—reflecting the tremendous value gained by these companies over this period.
The combination of low interest rates, low unemployment, and high investment rates and business growth combined to greatly expand the U.S. economy. According to the article "Excerpts from Federal Reserve Chairman's Testimony" (New York Times, January 21, 1999), Alan Greenspan (1926–), the chair of the Federal Reserve Board, described this expansion as "America's sparkling economic performance."
The 2000s: The Economy Begins to Falter
The first decade of the twenty-first century has been a tumultuous one for the U.S. economy. During the early 2000s the United States endured the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the outbreak of wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, corporate scandals, devastating hurricanes, and a slump in the stock market. Nevertheless, the economy remained robust, as evidenced by healthy growth in the gross domestic product (the total market value of final goods and services produced within an economy in a given year), relatively low unemployment rates, and moderate rates of inflation.
Around 2005 the economy began showing signs of stress. Growth in the gross domestic product slowed and unemployment and inflation rates started creeping upward. The housing market took a nosedive, and the U.S. dollar lost strength against international currencies. As of July 2008, investors and consumers nervously watched economic indicators amid speculation that a recession could be imminent.
THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR. In January 2001 George W. Bush (1946–) was inaugurated as the nation's new president. He entered the executive office with plans to overhaul many federal programs and enacted a tax cut within his first few months of being in office. On September 11, 2001, four commercial airliners were commandeered by hijackers. Two of the planes were flown into the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York City. A third plane was flown into the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. The fourth plane crashed in a field in Pennsylvania after passengers likely struggled with their hijackers. The attacks killed more than twenty-nine hundred people and stunned the world.
The so-called 9/11 attacks dramatically altered the priorities of the U.S. government. The United States went to war, first in Afghanistan (2001) and then in Iraq (2003). Even though the military campaigns were technically successful, U.S. military forces were unable to bring stability to these troubled nations. As of the summer of 2008, the U.S. military continued its presence in Afghanistan and Iraq. Both nations were trying to rebuild with U.S. assistance. Amy Belasco of the Congressional Research Service estimates in The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other Global War on Terror Operations since 9/11 (June 23, 2008, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33110.pdf) that in June 2008 the Afghanistan and Iraq campaigns had cost the United States over $828 billion.
THE INTERNET BUBBLE BURSTS. During the late 1990s the stock market witnessed tremendous growth, driven in large part by investor enthusiasm for Internet-related businesses. Access to the Internet became wide-spread in the United States and much of the developed world, creating many new market opportunities for entrepreneurs. Investors enthusiastically poured money into the stock of these new businesses. The National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotation System (NASDAQ) is a U.S.-based stock market on which the stock of many technology companies is traded. The NASDAQ composite index is a measure of the performance of many of the stocks on NASDAQ. In 1990 the index was less than five hundred. In early 2000 it peaked above four thousand during the height of the Internet stock craze. Many of the stocks had become overvalued; their high prices could not be sustained based on the actual financial results that the companies were producing. What followed was a sharp market correction, as investors sold off many Internet-based stocks, and the prices plummeted. By late 2002 the NASDAQ composite index was around twelve hundred, from which it slowly began to climb again.
In economics a bubble is a phenomenon in which investors overzealously invest (speculate) in a particular commodity or market sector that becomes overvalued. Excitement about possible gains overrules frank analysis of the underlying financial factors. Unfortunately, the very existence of a bubble is not evident until after the fact, when the bubble has burst and much value has been lost in the investments and the businesses involved.
THE HOUSING MARKET COLLAPSE. During the middle of the decade another bubble burst; this one was the U.S. housing market. Its collapse had serious and far-reaching consequences on the U.S. economy as a whole. As shown in Figure 1.13, the United States experienced historically low interest rates during the early 2000s. This spurred demand throughout the housing industry. Rising demand pushed prices upward. Homes in many areas of the country began to appreciate (rise in value) at an unprecedented rate. Investors eagerly bought houses and sold them a short time later for more money. Many banks and financial institutions became caught up in the frenzy and lowered their normally strict loan standards. They introduced new types of mortgages in which payments were low at first and then quickly rose over a certain period. Eager home buyers, especially first-time buyers, entered into these agreements without adequately considering the consequences to their personal finances.
In late 2005 and early 2006 the housing bubble burst. Overspeculation had pushed home prices above sustainable levels. Demand suddenly plummeted, and homes depreciated (lost value) in many areas of the country. Some mortgage holders defaulted (quit making payments) on their loans, putting extreme pressure on mortgage lenders. The housing market collapse put an enormous strain on the overall economy. As of July 2008, many analysts believed the full effects from the collapse had not been completely realized and would continue to plague the economy for several years to come.
The American Economy
"The U.S. Economy: Historical Overview ." The American Economy. . Encyclopedia.com. 28 Dec. 2021 <https://www.encyclopedia.com>.
"The U.S. Economy: Historical Overview ." The American Economy. . Encyclopedia.com. (December 28, 2021). https://www.encyclopedia.com/economics/economics-magazines/us-economy-historical-overview
"The U.S. Economy: Historical Overview ." The American Economy. . Retrieved December 28, 2021 from Encyclopedia.com: https://www.encyclopedia.com/economics/economics-magazines/us-economy-historical-overview
Inflation , Inflation is a sustained increase in the average level of prices across the economy. It causes money to lose value over time. The value of a dollar (… Stagflation , Inflation and unemployment are two powerful forces that are considered to be important signs of whether or not an economy is healthy. They usually ha… Deflation , Deflation is a general fall in the prices of goods and services in an economy over an extended period of time. Under conditions of deflation, money g… Great Depression , The Great Depression, the most significant economic slowdown in U.S. history, lasted from 1929 until about 1939. A depression is an especially severe… Fiscal Policy , Two of the main ways that a government influences its nation's economy are fiscal policy and monetary policy. Fiscal policy consists of a country's t… Recessions , A recession is a downturn in the economy. Economists have two ways of identifying when a recession is occurring. According to the most precise defini…
The American Economy—Historical Overview
Depression and World War II, 1929–1945 (Overview)
Causes of the Crash 1919-1929
An Era of Economic Instability, 1897–1920 (Overview)
Great Depression, Causes of (Issue)
Overview: Government's Role in the Economy
The Crash … and Beyond
The Tyrants
The Tyger
The Two Worlds of Jenny Logan
The Two Sisters
The Two Offers
The Two Mrs. Carrolls
The Two Middle Passages to Brazil, 1793
The Two Jakes
The Two Great Cavaliers
The Two Faces of Evil
The Two Faces of Dr. Jekyll
The Two Drovers by Sir Walter Scott, 1827
The Twisted Road
The Twilight Samurai
The Twilight of the Ice Nymphs
The Twilight of the Golds
The Twilight Girls
The Twentieth Century
The Twenties
The Twelve Dogs of Christmas
The Twelve Days of Christmas Eve
The U.S. Health Care System
The U.S. Vs. John Lennon
The UFO Examiner (Journal)
The UFO Mystery Grows
The Ugly American
The Ugly Dachshund
The Ulster Volunteer Resolutions
The Ultimate Imposter
The Ultimate Safari
The Ultimate Safari by Nadine Gordimer, 1991
The Ultimate Thrill
The Ultimate Warrior
The Ultimate Weapon
The Unapproachable
The Unbearable Lightness of Being
The Unbelievable Truth
The Unborn 2
The Uncanny
The Unchastened Woman
The Unconventional Family in Children's Literature
The Undead
The Undefeated


Rickety Rack's sensational strapless dresses will get you party prepped in a snap! We offer everything from strapless day dresses to strapless wedding dresses and every little bit in between! In fact, our insanely gorgeous record-setting strapless black dress (otherwise known as the "Black Diamond Dress") has been featured in Vogue, Elle, Glamour and Lucky magazine multiple times! Cute strapless dresses are a fantastic wardrobe essential, and we are the number one online boutique for strapless prom dresses and strapless homecoming dresses. Browse Rickety Rack's retro collection of unique and vintage-style dresses. Shop strapless cocktail dresses designed to electrify the crowd or opt for juniors strapless dresses with chic detailing and accents. We offer strapless statement dresses and strapless maxi dresses tailored to show off your curves! Every girl needs a strapless dress and the best place to buy it is Rickety Rack, the world's all-time favorite fashion destination!


text:
VIVARIUM Q&A
Vivarium Q&A at the London Film Festival 2019 with Director and Co-Writer Lorcan Finnegan, Co-writer Garret Shanley and Actors Imogen Poots and Jonathan Aris.
Comments have been mildly edited for clarity, and contain mild spoilers for the film. (One question contains the ending of the film)
Lorcan, this film shares some similarities one one of your previous short films, Foxes. Was Vivarium always intended to be an extension of the short?
LF: We made Foxes in 2011, and it was set in a ghost estate, these abandoned housing developments that were a result of the socio-economic crash in Ireland. Foxes was much more of a supernatural story but I think there were themes and ideas that we were interested in that we weren't quite finished with. We wanted to do a bigger extension in much more of a sci-fi, abstract, surreal kind of way.
Garret, how did you develop the ideas in Foxes and how did they develop in to Vivarium?
GS: Foxes (you can watch it on Youtube) was people separated from a sense of community and separated from nature and the results of that. Taking it to a fairytale level and amplifying it, to show how people relate to nature by removing them from nature. Both films are looking at houses and estates and how we've chosen to live our lives separate to nature, with no relation to nature.
Imogen and Jonathan, when you first read the script, what was it about this story that attracted your attention?
IP: I thought it was so unique and deeply strange. I saw immediately it could work on many levels. It could be a very compelling story looking at the ghost estates and the housing crisis in Ireland and these unfinished estates where you're essentially living alone. Aside from that, it was really the idea of motherhood that I found interesting, and the gender roles assigned to the characters in this realm. All of these things were highly relevant and potent. Then Jesse Eisenberg came on board as well as Jonathan, so it was just sort of a dream team.
JA: I thought the story was brilliantly compelling to read, but I approached it from the prism of playing this bizarre character. I found that such a unique challenge really, as you rarely get to play someone that odd. Performing it was equally crazy as I just got to turn up a few times and be odd in front of Imogen and Jesse and watch them react with 'What an earth is this guy doing?' very much as actors as well as characters. I didn't really know either, so it was a unique experience, but a great film.
How did Jesse Eisenberg come to be involved in the project and what was it like working with him?
LF: We cast Imogen first as it's basically Gemma's story, and Imogen and I sat down and started thinking about who we would get to play the guy. Imogen actually suggested Jesse and I thought, that's really interesting, that could totally work. I went out and made a quick call to the producers to see if it worked with our financing plan and all that and they were like yes, definitely. So I went back in and said do it, as Imogen knew Jesse. She literally fired him the script on her phone there and then and he read it in like two days or something. He loved it, he really responded well to it, I think Imogen kind of knew he would dig in to the strange story.
IP: Definitely, he was so incredible in the film. I do think it's rare unfortunately, to find a male actor who's willing to essentially play second fiddle in terms of the page count of the script, and he was totally game. He just wants to be a part of cool things and support women, which is great.
LF: Totally, he even slashed loads of his own dialogue, he was like 'I don't need to say any of that, it's fine.'
How did you get that almost demonic performance out of the kid actor (Senan Jennings) in the film?
LF: He's an actual demon, he was summoned. Nah, he's brilliant, he was only 7 when we shot it, we saw a lot of kids, most of them couldn't really relate to the character and understand. Senan actually read it, the whole script and he totally got it. He sent in a self tape and that was pretty bloody good, and then he sent in another one where he even did the whole rolling his eyes back and did the scream. We were like holy shit. So it was trying to match everyone else with him really, as he was the trickiest person to cast. He loved filming it, you'd be holding him back and then 'let him act' and he'd run on set and do his thing. His parents weren't pushy, his mum was so normal, she was like 'I don't know what's wrong with him'.
The production design is so striking, what did you intend with that?
LF: Even in the script from the very early stage, the house was described as being a little bit like René Magritte's Empire of Light painting, there's no wind, there's no rain, the clouds are super still and odd. We did some tests very early on before anyone was involved to see the full cg drive through of the place, testing it's scale, distance and all that kind of stuff. When we got in to prep production designer Phillip Murphy and I went through it all and he found some genius ways of reusing parts. We ended up building 3 exterior houses in a warehouse in Belgium and then using that as basically everything. We shot in the evenings, effects supervisor Peter Hjorth shot plates so we could extend the scene and therefore the environment. We used CGI to create a set that was exactly the same as our actual set for extensions, and then 2D matte paintings. The green colour of the houses, came about by reading a lot about colour theory and its effect psychologically on an audience. Green is a really interesting colour as in nature it can have a really lovely feel, but when you completely eradicate nature from the picture it can take on this kind of toxic waste, poisonous colour. It also bounces light back on the actors faces and gives them a green cast of skin tone which made them look sicker the longer they were there.
You mentioned Magritte already, but did you have any other points of reference when you were making the film?
LF: You kind of back pedal in to those things as it took a long time to get the film running. But there were things like Teshigahara's Woman in the Dunes, Todd Hayne's film Safe, there was The Quiet Earth, Red Desert, Roy Anderson in terms of the lighting and the artificial.
GS: There's a good British tradition of getting the familiar and making it really scary, changing the context. So you'd have a train station or a house with two kids living in and it's just made terrifying and you're not really sure why.
LF: There is something interesting in making the normal feel abnormal and kind of terrifying.
Where exactly did the lizard people idea originate?
LF: They were inspired by the brood parasite, the European Cuckoo, and it's lifecycle. They rattle like magpies. There's a David Attenborough documentary and it's really interesting, but I remember when we were watching it again we were like 'Jesus'. We were also at the time thinking about an original monster for nowadays like how Godzilla was the atomic bomb and the Daleks were Nazis.
GS: And our monsters should be estate agents.
Lorcan with Without Name and Vivarium you've made two quite interesting and idiosyncratic horror-ish, sci-fi-ish films. Do you plan to stay working within the genre?
Yeah, we're working on two new projects, one of them is a supernatural revenge thriller about fast fashion and the exploitation of the East by the West, there's a Filipino witchcraft and spontaneous combustion element to it. The other one is called Goliath and it's a kind of dystopian dark fable, a re-imagining of the David and Goliath story but it's about creating monsters to start wars and steal national resources.
MARCH. 25TH. 2020.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


A master class with Jon Agee in the Trustees Room at The New York Public Library. Photo by Pat Swain.
Because each of our partners does a little, The Academy can do a lot.
Our institutional partners are central to The Academy's identity. They give us access to experts and artists, donate books, and host our events in their most dignified rooms. Together, we demonstrate that the great city of New York values the teachers who best prepare our children to be engaged citizens and valuable employees.


We would like to hire a talented programmer/WEB design whiz to quickly convert a paper-based assessment questionnaire into a simple online questionnaire/assessment tool. The questionnaire is about 2-3 pages.
The way it works is the user would complete the questionnaire online and based on the responses, the online tool would tabulate scores and spit out scores/report instantly or close to instant.
We expect the project to take less than 2 to 3 duration days and a few hours actual work. You must have intermediate programming and web design skills to be able to design an aesthetically pleasing online questionnaire without supervision. 100% content provided. You must be able to integrate the online tool with PDF or Word. Example: the output must be printable in PDF or Word after the user completes the online questionnaire.
We expect the project to cost no more than $50 to 75 USD.
This is an ideal project for talented interns and recent IT graduates.
Hi there, I understand that you need an online assessment tool. Lets please discuss in more detail about the questionnaire, output/report formats. I look forward to hear from. Thanks.
I am a new freelancer here and u I have my friend with me with whom I can help you with the project described here. Please give us a chance.


text:
FDA Approves Copiktra Capsules for 2 Lymphoma Types, Verastem Announces
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved Copiktra (duvelisib) capsules for the treatment of adults with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) after a minimum of two prior therapies.
The medicine also received accelerated approval for follicular lymphoma patients whose disease returned or failed to respond to at least two prior systemic therapies. Continued approval for follicular lymphoma depends on clinical benefits in confirmatory trials.
Developed by Verastem Oncology, Copiktra the first approved dual inhibitor of PI3K-delta and and PI3K-gamma, two enzymes known to support the growth and survival of malignant immune B-cells.
CLL and SLL are common types of indolent, or slow-growing, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. They are essentially the same disease, differing in the primary cancer location. When the cancer cells are mainly in the bloodstream and the bone marrow, the disease is referred to as CLL, while SLL refers to when the cancer cells are mostly in the lymph nodes.
"With today's FDA approval of Copiktra, Verastem Oncology is delivering upon our commitment to patients with cancer by bringing a new oral medicine to market," Robert Forrester, the company's president and CEO, said in a press release. "We are driven by the strength and courage of those battling cancer, and we are committed to advancing therapies such as Copkitra with the potential to make a significant impact for patients, their caregivers and physicians."
Copiktra's approval is based on clinical trial results from more than 400 adults — the Phase 2 DYNAMO study (NCT01882803) for indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and the DUO Phase 3 clinical trial (NCT02004522) for CLL/SLL.
DYNAMO included patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma — including follicular lymphoma patients and SLL — who had failed to respond to Rituxan (rituximab), developed by Biogen and Genentech.
Among the 83 patients with follicular lymphoma, 42% achieved at least a partial reduction in their tumors. Response rates for SLL were 68%.
DUO compared the effectiveness of stand-alone therapy with 25 mg Copiktra versus Novartis' Arzerra (ofatumumab) in 319 patients with relapsed or refractory CLL/SLL following at least one prior therapy.
In a subset of heavily treated patients — those with at least two previous lines of therapy — progression-free survival results showed that Copiktra outperformed Arzerra, and it was on this point that approval was based. Specifically, these advanced patients treated with Copiktra remained progression free for a median of 16.4 months, compared to 9.1 months in those using Arzerra.
"We are immensely grateful to the many patients who participated in the duvelisib clinical trial program," Forrester said.
"Copiktra is an important addition to the evolving treatment paradigm for patients with CLL/SLL and FL [follicular lymphoma]," said Ian Flinn, MD, PhD, the lead investigator of the DYNAMO and DUO studies.
FDA approval follows its April 2018 decision to grant Copiktra priority review as a potential treatment for the two lymphoma types.
"Each lymphoma patient's experience is unique, and today's approval offers patients with CLL/SLL and FL a new treatment option and a new opportunity for hope," said Meghan Gutierrez, CEO of the Lymphoma Research Foundation. "We applaud the FDA, Verastem and the patients who participated in the clinical trials."
The therapy will be available on the U.S. market immediately. Verastem will help patients access the medication through its personalized Verastem Cares program, which provide information and assistance to patients prescribed Copiktra.
"We are excited to offer a new treatment that can allow patients to manage their disease with an oral monotherapy," said Joseph Lobacki, Verastem's executive vice president and chief commercial officer.
"We continue to hear from physicians and patients that there is a great need for additional treatment options to fight chronic cancers such as CLL/SLL and FL," said Lobacki, who added that the company has already assembled an experienced oncology commercial team and established its distribution network to prepare for Copiktra's commercialization.
Verastem cautions that Copiktra treatment may cause four fatal and/or serious toxicities — infections, diarrhea or colitis, skin reactions, and pneumonitis. Full prescribing information for Copiktra is available here.
Verastem is implementing a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy offering dosing and safety information to support physicians' management of patients on Copiktra.
The company's management team recently hosted a conference call to discuss Copiktra's approval. A replay of the webcast is now available on Verastem's website.
Tagged chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma, Copiktra (duvelisib), FDA, follicular lymphoma, Verastem Oncology.
Previous: Burlington, Leukemia & Lymphoma Society Team Up to Raise Funds, Support Young Survivors
Next:Abdominal Obesity Better Than BMI at Predicting Risk for Blood Diseases, Study Shows
Pingback: FDA Approval of Lymphoma Therapy Copiktra Supported by Study's Publication


text:
Target/Movies, Music & Books/Movies/All Movie Genres
Tom & Jerry: Spotlight Collection 2 (DVD)
Parental info
What's GiftNow?
Movie MPAA Rating: Nr
Movie Studio: Warner Bros.
Movie Genre: Family & Personal Relationships, Kids and Family
Software Format: DVD
Street Date: October 3, 2017
Containing 40 of the finest TOM AND JERRY cartoons to ever hit television and cinema screens, this second collection of cat and mouse classics offers a great chance for viewers to revel in their escapades once again. Interestingly, this collection reaches far back into the TOM AND JERRY archives, with a selection of early screen appearances from the feuding feline and the mercurial mouse. An impressive three Academy Award nominations were picked up by various cartoons included here, while a behind-the-scenes documentary on the actors who voice the characters sheds further light on the creative process that brings these loveable and enduring characters to life.
Trending All Movie Genres
Game of Thrones: The Complete Eighth Season (Bluray + Digital)
Game of Thrones: The Complete Eighth Season (DVD)
The Big Bang Theory: The Twelfth and Final Season (DVD)
Line Of Duty (Blu-ray + Digital)
Running with the Devil (Blu-ray)
Game of Thrones: Complete Series Limited Edition Collector's Set (Blu-Ray + Digital)


text:
BDSNews
UN releases black lists of intl companies involved in illegal Israeli settlements
QudsN Send an email February 12, 2020Last Updated: February 12, 2020
United Nations (QNN)- The United Nations human rights office has released the long-awaited report on companies that have business ties to illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.
In a statement on Wednesday, the UN body said it identified 112 business entities which it has reasonable grounds to conclude have ties with Israeli settlements across the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem- 94 domiciled in Israel and 18 in six other countries.
International companies listed in the document include Airbnb, Booking.com, Expedia, JCB, Opodo, TripAdvisor and Motorola Solutions.
Michelle Bachelet, the UN high commissioner for human rights, said the companies' activities "raised particular human rights concerns".
"I am conscious this issue has been and will continue to be, highly contentious," Bachelet said in a statement.
"However, after an extensive and meticulous review process, we are satisfied this fact-based report reflects the serious consideration that has been given to this unprecedented and highly complex mandate, and that it responds appropriately to the Human Rights Council's request contained in resolution 31/36."
Airbnb said in November 2018 that it would remove listings in Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.
But it said the following April that it would not implement the planned delisting and would donate proceeds from any bookings in the territory to international humanitarian aid organisations.
About 600,000 Israeli colonizers live in about 140 settlements built since the occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem in 1967. The settlements are considered illegal under international law.
Commenting on the release of the list, the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement, said the UN was "significant" but "incomplete".
"The database is incomplete. All companies that are complicit in Israel's apartheid regime and its grave violations of Palestinian rights under international law must be added to ensure accountability," BDS said in a statement.
Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Maliki hailed the decision, calling a "victory for international law".
"Publishing this list of companies and entities operating in the settlements is a victory for international law and diplomatic efforts," Malki said in a statement.
QudsN
© Copyright 2021, All Rights Reserved | Quds News Network


text:
Love me …
loathe me …
Dr Oliver Hartwich
Views from Wellington
Business Spectator column
National Business Review column
Ideas@TheCentre
Print and online
German radio
'Life Matters'
No more hope or glory for Britain
Published in Business Spectator (Melbourne), 11 March 2010
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/No-more-hope-or-glory-for-Britain-pd20100309-3CTHG?OpenDocument&src=sph
The last time the Bank of England had much reason to celebrate was on March 13, 2007. It was on this day that Britain's central bankers put their stylish new £20 note into circulation, which carries on it a portrait of Adam Smith. At the time, it replaced the increasingly dated looking £20 note that had depicted Edward Elgar, Britain's most famous composer.
Sadly for sterling, though, the great economist did not turn out to be a lucky charm. Since the day that the Bank of England dropped the composer of the music for Land of Hope and Glory, the British currency lost much of its value – 22 per cent against the US dollar, 24 per cent against the troubled euro and even 33 per cent against the Australian dollar. That's bad enough, but much worse is to come if the country does not manage to reassure investors of its fiscal credibility.
While the Greek crisis has dominated international headlines for weeks, few commentators had paid much attention to sterling's difficulties. True, the British growth and budget figures hardly looked more convincing than Greece's, but at least there was the idea that a likely new conservative government after this year's UK general election would sort out Britain's public finances.
It was a single opinion poll in the London Sunday Times which reminded analysts that election results should never be treated as a foregone conclusion. The Tory lead, which had at one stage been more than 20 per cent, had shrunk to a meagre 2 points. Thanks to the UK's electoral system, such a result at the ballot box could lead to a hung parliament. It might even help British Prime Minister Gordon Brown to keep the keys to Downing Street, albeit as head of minority government – and as the most unpopular British Prime Minister of all time.
After the Sunday Times published its poll, sterling's fall, which had begun years earlier, accelerated. Markets hate nothing more than uncertainty, and the feeble state of public opinion in Britain revealed a great deal of just that. Suddenly a Conservative government was almost as likely as a hung parliament, a Labour minority government, or even a coalition government with largely unknown quantities like the Liberal Democrats or even the Ulster Unionists. What any of these alternatives would mean for future fiscal policy in Britain is left to educated guesswork.
In one sense, though, the market's panic reaction to the decimated lead of the Conservative party is curious for it assumes that at least an incoming Tory administration under would-be Prime Minister David Cameron had a clear idea about how to tackle Britain's gargantuan budget deficit of £178 billion. However, nothing could be further from the truth. In the face of the greatest public finance challenge the UK has experienced for decades the oppositional Tories are as vague in their response to the crisis as the incumbent Labour Party.
The lack of a credible Conservative alternative to Labour's fiscal policy has a long history. Before the financial crisis, British political debates about public finances had been framed almost entirely in terms of Labour 'investment' in public services versus Tory cuts. When Gordon Brown was still Chancellor of the Exchequer, he had successfully scared voters in the 2005 election about possible hospital closures under a potential Tory government.
To avoid falling into this trap once more, Conservative leader David Cameron promised early on in his leadership to honour Labour's spending plans, putting off any thoughts of fiscal consolidation. Although the financial crisis should have rendered these plans obsolete, it took the Tories until spring 2009 to finally withdraw their commitment to increased public spending. Yet they did not manage to spell out their alternative to Labour's spending plans, either.
Thus the Conservative Party's strategy for budget consolidation remains nebulous at best and self-contradictory at worst. For example, David Cameron ran a personal advertising campaign in January of this year under the slogan "I'll cut the deficit, not the National Health Service". Such empty rhetoric can hardly bolster his economic credentials since any attempt at reducing the deficit that excludes one of the biggest chunks of government spending will not work. In the same way, Mr Cameron has already ruled out "swingeing cuts" for his first year in office. Yet it is precisely such decisive action on the deficit that financial markets expect from the next government.
In a sense, the market's reaction to the tightening opinion polls is thus ironic. The greatest danger to Britain's long-term fiscal health does not result from the indecisiveness of the voters or the pitfalls of the electoral system. It is the lack of clarity and conviction of all parties that should worry analysts. Neither Brown nor Cameron, nor any other British politician for that matter, has so far had the courage to spell out which steps are necessary to bring the deficit under control. But with no such commitment to spending cuts or tax increases, no party will be able to claim a mandate for tough but ultimately unavoidable reforms after the election.
The stakes for Britain could hardly be higher. A return to the pre-crisis times of 'Cool Britannia', let alone Elgar's Land of Hope and Glory is nowhere in sight. And instead of only printing Adam Smith's portrait on their bank notes, British policy-makers should rather have read the great master. In the Wealth of Nations published in 1776 he wrote: "The practice of funding has gradually enfeebled every state which has adopted it. … Is it likely that in Great Britain alone a practice which has brought either weakness or desolation into every other country should prove altogether innocent?"
The value of the bank notes carrying Adam Smith's portrait now depends on how seriously policy-makers are going to take his warning against reckless public spending.
Search and translate
Enter your email address to follow me and receive notifications of new articles by email.
Categories Select Category Business Spectator (286) Capital (8) Die Welt (9) Ideas@TheCentre (71) Inside Politics (23) Insights (252) Interest.co.nz (20) National Business Review (87) Newsroom (46) Research reports (42) Speeches (20) Stuff.co.nz (5) Sydney Morning Herald (13) The Australian (39) The Dominion Post (5) The New Zealand Herald (10) Uncategorised (168)
Archives Select Month December 2020 (5) November 2020 (6) October 2020 (7) September 2020 (7) August 2020 (7) July 2020 (5) June 2020 (6) May 2020 (9) April 2020 (7) March 2020 (5) February 2020 (6) January 2020 (1) December 2019 (3) November 2019 (7) October 2019 (4) September 2019 (4) August 2019 (9) July 2019 (3) June 2019 (4) May 2019 (9) April 2019 (6) March 2019 (8) February 2019 (5) December 2018 (5) November 2018 (7) October 2018 (4) September 2018 (4) August 2018 (8) July 2018 (4) June 2018 (6) May 2018 (4) April 2018 (4) March 2018 (6) February 2018 (4) December 2017 (3) November 2017 (4) October 2017 (4) September 2017 (8) August 2017 (7) July 2017 (4) June 2017 (5) May 2017 (3) April 2017 (3) March 2017 (5) February 2017 (3) January 2017 (2) December 2016 (5) November 2016 (3) October 2016 (5) September 2016 (4) August 2016 (4) July 2016 (4) June 2016 (4) May 2016 (6) April 2016 (5) March 2016 (7) February 2016 (7) January 2016 (3) December 2015 (6) November 2015 (10) October 2015 (11) September 2015 (8) August 2015 (10) July 2015 (10) June 2015 (9) May 2015 (9) April 2015 (10) March 2015 (7) February 2015 (10) January 2015 (7) December 2014 (8) November 2014 (5) October 2014 (12) September 2014 (7) August 2014 (7) July 2014 (9) June 2014 (9) May 2014 (6) April 2014 (10) March 2014 (7) February 2014 (7) January 2014 (8) December 2013 (2) November 2013 (6) October 2013 (12) September 2013 (8) August 2013 (11) July 2013 (9) June 2013 (10) May 2013 (8) April 2013 (8) March 2013 (10) February 2013 (8) January 2013 (7) December 2012 (6) November 2012 (9) October 2012 (8) September 2012 (8) August 2012 (14) July 2012 (9) June 2012 (7) May 2012 (2) April 2012 (4) March 2012 (10) February 2012 (8) January 2012 (7) December 2011 (10) November 2011 (9) October 2011 (10) September 2011 (16) August 2011 (9) July 2011 (16) June 2011 (8) May 2011 (4) April 2011 (9) March 2011 (14) February 2011 (8) January 2011 (7) December 2010 (14) November 2010 (7) October 2010 (18) September 2010 (5) August 2010 (9) July 2010 (9) June 2010 (11) May 2010 (9) April 2010 (10) March 2010 (11) February 2010 (6) January 2010 (3) December 2009 (6) November 2009 (3) October 2009 (6) September 2009 (4) August 2009 (3) July 2009 (2) June 2009 (5) May 2009 (6) April 2009 (3) March 2009 (9) February 2009 (3) January 2009 (4) December 2008 (5) November 2008 (4) October 2008 (3) September 2008 (3) August 2008 (5) July 2008 (4) June 2008 (2) May 2008 (4) April 2008 (4) March 2008 (8) February 2008 (4) January 2008 (5) December 2007 (1) November 2007 (7) October 2007 (7) September 2007 (3) August 2007 (4) July 2007 (3) June 2007 (3) April 2007 (4) March 2007 (2) January 2007 (3) December 2006 (5) November 2006 (1) October 2006 (2) September 2006 (1) August 2006 (1) July 2006 (2) April 2006 (1) March 2006 (2) February 2006 (1) January 2006 (1) December 2005 (1) November 2005 (1) October 2005 (2) September 2005 (2) June 2005 (3) May 2005 (1) February 2005 (1) March 2004 (1)
Angela Merkel Australia Brexit British politics Car industry Covid-19 David Cameron Debt Demography Economics EU Euro Euro crisis Europe Fiscal policy German Germany Global Financial Crisis Greece Housing Law Liberalism Local government Localism Migration Monetary policy Multiculturalism New Zealand Planning Political philosophy Satire Switzerland Think tanks Town and Country Planning Act UK Urban economics
View hartwich's profile on Facebook
View oliverhartwich's profile on Twitter
View oliverhartwich's profile on LinkedIn
View olivermarchartwich's profile on YouTube
The New Zealand Initiative
Level 12, Bayleys Building
36 Brandon Street
Wellington 6011, New Zealand
The errors of Hans-Hermann Hoppe
Die Irrtümer des Hans-Hermann Hoppe - Strategien der Befreiung?
An open letter to Mike Hosking on housing
We don't know how unlucky we are in NZ
Has Germany's bubble finally burst?
Die grünen Geister, die Frau Thatcher mit ihrer Klimadebatte rief
Copyright © 2021	Powered by WordPress.com.


A high performing NHS Trust that provides a full range of acute services with some community and specialist services, are looking for an interim Clinical Risk Manager for at least a 3-month period.
Advise and support divisional and corporate leads in the effective use of the risk register.
The ability to manage competing priorities.


This rhodonite angel pendant measures about 1.9cm high, about 1.4cm across the wings, and about 6mm in depth. Please note, this pendant does not come with a chain.
As you can see it has a little dip in it's back.


text:
Q: JQuery Syntax Question? What does the following JQuery code mean and how would the HTML code look like using the following JQuery code?
Here is the JQuery code.
$("div.result").html(html);

A: Your snippet searches the HTML document for a
 with the class name result. If the element is found then the contents of html will replace the contents of the found element.
Thus, if html is Hello World! This:

Well, hi there.

Will be:

Hello World!

A: That will throw a error, unless the html variable is set elsewhere.
If you are trying to set the HTMLto itself, why? But it would be:
$("div.result").html($(this).html());

A: simply it set the innerHTML of all div of class result to the value of html

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange