• "Well written, well researched, and the thesis put forth is well argued.... Woods has opened up an area of historical analysis that should invite further study."
    -Journal of American History

  • "During these times that challenge our freedoms there is no one more qualified to make U.S. history relevant to the fight against big government than Thomas Woods."
    -Barry Goldwater Jr.
    Former Member of Congress

  • "I strongly recommend Woods's work."
    -The Honorable Ron Paul,
    U.S. House of Representatives

  • "Written with great clarity and fluency, making the complex philosophical and theological concepts approachable."
    -Journal of American Studies

  • "A must-read."
    -Barron's

  • "An excellent reading source for anyone interested in financial markets, and much more so for anyone interested in learning about capitalism without all the misinterpretations being thrown about in the financial media."
    -Asia Times

  • "Provocative, well-written, and deserves to be read."
    -Catholic Historical Review

  • "An engaging and important contribution to scholarship on the history of American Catholicism."
    -Journal of the Historical Society

  • "Woods and [co-author Kevin] Gutzman appeal to both left and right in this constitutionalist jeremiad…. The authors' exegeses of the Constitution and court decisions, heavy on original intent arguments, are lucid and telling."
    -Publishers Weekly

  • "A marvelous read. Every chapter taught me something new and unexpected."
    -Tom Bethell, senior editor,
    The American Spectator

  • "The hottest book today is Meltdown, by my friend Tom Woods."
    -Judge Andrew Napolitano, senior judicial analyst,
    FOX News Channel

  • "Should be required reading."
    -Economic Affairs (London)

  • "Woods, one of the best classical liberal [libertarian] scholars of his generation, has once more placed us in his debt with this lucid and tightly argued book."
    -David Gordon, The Mises Review

  • "Tom Woods is one of my dearest allies in the struggle against wrong-headed and dangerous economic policy."
    -Peter Schiff

Warren Harding and the Forgotten Depression of 1920

Wouldn’t it be terrible if government cut its budget and the Federal Reserve didn’t increase the money supply during a depression?  Well, that’s exactly what was done in 1920-21.  Not only did the Earth not break free of its axis and go tumbling toward the sun, but the downturn was reversed in short order.  Here’s my article on this issue.  The YouTube is about to hit 50,000 views.

  • Tim Reynolds

    Hi Tom,

    Great speech. During the Great Depression, successive Canadian gov’ts did exactly what you prescribe, that is, cut taxes and spending, and, yet, Canadians suffered a horrible depression (although not one Canadian bank failed). How do you reconcile these different outcomes?

    Best,

    Tim

  • http://none Alan

    What did the Canadian Central Bank do during that time frame?

  • http://www.stoned.com Anita Bonghit

    Apparently the Canadian Government didn’t do “exactly” the same thing. The US escaped the 1920 depression in less than 18 months because the allowed the economy to repair itself and they did not stifle business through oppressive taxation. There is a FACT of economics that when taxes go down revenues go up. Even John F. Kennedy knew that and lowered taxes during his short term to help the economy. The real problem is that progressive liberals don’t like facts that get in the way of their agenda. Progressive Liberals love oppressive taxation and believe they are the aristocracy.

  • http://www.thomasewoods.com woods

    I appreciate what you are saying, but it is not a law of economics that lower tax rates lead to higher revenues. They can, but this is an empirical rather than a theoretical question. (It’s obviously not true that if we lower rates from 11% to 0% the government will earn more revenue.) It depends on whether the existing tax rates are in the prohibitive range identified by Laffer.

  • Amonite

    Woods, check out the ‘laffer curve’. You can google it. Certainly 0% brings 0 revenue, but neither does 100% bring 100% revenue. (The majority of people would stop working under such a system, or the money flow starts moving through tax loopholes and to other states/countries that are less oppressive. Indeed, I believe everything above 50% is considered ‘the prohibitive range’ in which taxing any higher gets less and less return. And between state and federal taxes, and the hidden taxes we pay every day, one would be surprised at the high tax rate the upper tax brackets and businesses (which drive our economy!) are forced into paying while the lower brackets pay into the system very little or none at all.

  • http://www.thomasewoods.com woods

    I’m well aware of the Laffer Curve, having written the entry on it for a recent encyclopedia. The Laffer Curve does not say every single rate reduction will increase revenues. That holds true only if (for one thing) the initial rates are in the so-called prohibitive range.

  • http://www.chinaadv.com/ William T

    HA! I am quite interested in your site. If I were to use this website, I could earn you 200-1000 USD daily. I am willing to work on monetizing your site, on the condition that you share 50% of revenues with me. If you are interested, please send me an email. :)