Most of those were caused and exacerbated by regional banks with fractional reserve charters. Check out historical measures of money supply before and during those periods cited. You'll find bankers were playing the same games of credit expansion and contraction, long before the FED ever came into existence. Its only in 1913 did the ENTIRE COuntry go under uncontested and TOTAL rule by the Bankers. Prior 1913, there were periods where central and/or regional banks were dissolved and America enjoyed relativily free markets. If you want to get serious, find a country with a hard money standard that wasn't egregiously manipulated by the bankers/goldsmiths.
ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.....america has not had FREE markets in a very long time. We have had "gamed" and manipulated markets mixed with ever growing government interference and an unconstitutional fiat currency!!!
Good observation. I've done it and its the same shit. Fractional reserve banks (regional or central) operated during most of those panics cited, and money supply leading up, during and following the crash mirrored perfectly what we see today. Huge increase in money supply = boom precipitious decrease in money supply = crash + depression. Same shit, different generation. This is a very old scam and until the Brainwashed Sheeple wake up to the inter-generational fraud Bankers have perped on our linage, we'll never solve the real heart of the matter. And thats leverage created from nothing = fractional reserve lending and privately-owned, central "Banks". Which are not Banks, at all. Just institutions legally authorized to create money from nothing. And the fools just eat it up. Can't get enough. Imagine the power inherent in legally creating limitless amounts of money...... Thats what they did. Thats why they rule the world. Very, very simple.
You're thinking is so muddled it truly defies comprehension. Banks have always engaged in "fractional reserve lending". All of them. It's what a bank does. It's their business. It is compatible with free markets. I don't know why you would think that the presence of banking automatically means there aren't free markets. Capitalism arose when the Church's restrictions on lending at interest were either circumvented or overthrown. If you can't lend at interest, you don't have free markets. As soon as you can lend at interest you start the practice of "fractional reserve lending", because the business model makes perfect sense. It's been around since the founding of this Republic. It has precisely zip to do with whether or not there has or hasn't been a central bank.
oh yeah, countries like North Korean and Iran where government treats their citizen literally like slave without manipulating their banking systems. It is hardly ideal economy at all.
Any one using Bush's tenure to judge the merits of the free market is like using the fact that China has grown so fast in the last decade to justify communism. Lets face it, this type of philosophical posturing is all just a prelude to frameing the language to justify a big move toward more big government high tax socialism ala Europe 1970s. I feel sorry for whoever hasn't already made their money at this point, you missed or are too late for the good years.
Trefoil and Jamis just got their asses kicked in this argument. It's amazing people think they are experts on everything simply by saying Bush killed the economy because he lowered taxes. Either it was the media or college that convinced these people that they can somehow form a deep understanding about an issue by listening to talking points. Idiots.