Of course, the government should always make sure whatever money it tries to fight recession with is actually used for a good purpose

They can be though

Sorry, jumping in here, they actually employed a lot of visual artists

They provide water and electricity

Which wasn't really necessary imo

Oh yeah, the national art foundation and stuff

not necessary

just helped art

But it wasn't what consumers demanded

It was forced by the government

The resources at the time could be used elsewhere

helped consumers though

And making tanks helped consumers too

by protecting the nations

but they didn't demand it

Well

The scarce resources were used in other ways.

Aside from employing manufacturers, it didn't help consumers directly; only indirectly

Yeah, consumers never demanded it. The whole reason an economic system exists is to meet consumer demands

The thing about the spending was that it helped reduce the hoarding of money that had helped contribute to the depression (saving is good, hoarding is not)

Not to mention that the above-market wages forced by the government caused a bunch of people to become unemployed as well

What is hoarding defined as?

Yeah we said that xd

But of course, the war wasn't fought to help consumers; it was fought because of Pearl Harbor and the Nazis

So parts of the New Deal hurt the people who really needed it

hoarding is when saving becomes cyclical

Yeah, it boosted gdp though.

Whoops my bad

Which didn't improve the material standard of living

the war sort of did end the depression

Not at-all

The depression continued until post war

Boosting gdp growth with tanks and warships

Creating almost 0%unemployment isn't actually a challenge when the nations at war and theres a draft.

If every worker was staffed in the army and fleet we'd have full unemployment

and nothing to eat

but also 0 GDP

no production

*plus that debt-to-GDP ratio tho*

0 gdp?

The GDP went up