What was the "charitable rich and President Hoover's reaction and opinions requiring assisting people who were affected by The Great Depression?

Hoover adopted a typical Keynesian textbook behavior after the stock market crashed. He immediately cut the income tax rates by 1% (valid for fiscal year 1929) and began to increase federal spending, increasing it by 42% between the fiscal years of 1930 and 1932.

But in order to really assess Hoover's genuinely Keynesian credentials, it is worth remembering that this huge increase in spending occurred simultaneously with a collapse in tax revenues, resulting both from the decline in economic activity and the price deflation of the early 1930s. This combination caused the Hoover administration to generate a level of deficits hitherto unprecedented in American history, for periods of peace. And what's more interesting: the Roosevelt presidential campaign platform attacked precisely those Hoover achievements

religion was the center of there society they practiced human sacrifices and which they believed kept there god strong and that he would keep bad guys away hope this

in the united states, the president is controlled by the

constitution, and in all respects subordinate to it. insofar

as it deals with presidential power, however, the american

constitution has proved to be a highly malleable document.

with very few exceptions,' the constitutional provisions relating to the president have not been changed at all since

they were ratified in 1787. but in the late twentieth century, those provisions do not mean what they meant in

1787. the constitution is a legal document, and it is enforced judicially; but its meaning was hardly fixed when it

was ratified. in particular, the contemporary president has

far broader powers than the original constitution contemplated. it is remarkable but true that large-scale changes in

the authority of the president have been brought about

without changes in the constitutional text, but nevertheless

without significant illegality.

this is a paradox. is it not clear that constitutional

changes, if not textual, are illegal? the paradox has considerable relevance to our current thinking about the presidency in particular and about constitutionalism in general.

perhaps the framers of the american constitution feared

legislative power most of all; 2 but from well-known events

in the twentieth century, it is possible to conclude that it is

presidential power that holds out the greatest risks to both

liberty and democracy. the president is by far the most visible leader in the nation; he is often the only person in government with a national constituency. moreover, he is