Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I think that's the subtext.
I just wish it was the supertext.
Here you go[1].
The Lack of Major Wars May Be Hurting Economic Growth
21–30 of 46 posts
Re: The Lack of Major Wars May Be Hurting Economic Growth
#22We need to get everyone who calls for war to go fight them... you know.. for the economy.
Re: The Lack of Major Wars May Be Hurting Economic Growth
#23Yeah so in today's dollars the Iraq War cost more than World War 1, so says the Congressional Research Service:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS22926.pdf
Re: The Lack of Major Wars May Be Hurting Economic Growth
#24Once again, WWII did not get us out of the depression, it was the changes in government spending and tax policy between 1946 to 1948. Roosevelt was a disaster just as much as Wilson and Hoover. Truman was overruled by Congress who cut spending and taxes when Truman wanted to keep it. Reconcile the war lovers with rationing that occurred.
What is the basis of this statement? The economists I've read say that the US gov't didn't do enough in the 1930s (I'm not sure how much Congress and how much Roosevelt are to blame), as they lacked the political will to spend as much as was needed.
Re: The Lack of Major Wars May Be Hurting Economic Growth
#25The unspoken assumption in this theory is that growth is good. What about peace and love? Isn't that good too? I wonder what Orwell would have thought about this.
> The unspoken assumption in this theory is that growth is good. What about peace and love? Isn't that good too?
Does one preclude the other? Generally, economic resources are necessary, but not sufficient, for happiness. We still need growth because we do not yet generate enough resources either worldwide or in the U.S., to meet people's needs.
If you question whether that's true about the U.S., consider health care; we can't afford to provide all that people need.
> I wonder what Orwell would have thought about this.
I'm not sure what Orwell has to do with it. Have I been trolled?
Re: The Lack of Major Wars May Be Hurting Economic Growth
#26War is destruction. People who claim that war somehow creates wealth are profoundly idiotic, to say the least. Reference: "That Which is Seen, and That Which is Not Seen", by Frédéric Bastiat, in English [1] and the original in French [2] (Ce qu'on voit et ce qu'on ne voit pas) [1] http://bastiat.org/en/twisatwins.html [2] http://bastiat.org/fr/cqovecqonvp.html
I don't think that's a fair response to the article - it's arguing something more nuanced. Right in the 4th paragraph is this: > This view does not claim that fighting wars improves economies, as of course the actual conflict brings death and destruction. The claim is also distinct from the Keynesian argument that preparing for war lifts government spending and puts people to work. Rather, the very possibility of war…
The argument seems a bit too nuanced if there is such a thing.
"The Lack of Major Wars May Be Hurting Economic Growth" "This view does not claim that fighting wars improves economies"
How can both of these things be true?
Re: The Lack of Major Wars May Be Hurting Economic Growth
#27This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard, I am not even going to read this article.
Re: The Lack of Major Wars May Be Hurting Economic Growth
#28Once again, WWII did not get us out of the depression, it was the changes in government spending and tax policy between 1946 to 1948. Roosevelt was a disaster just as much as Wilson and Hoover. Truman was overruled by Congress who cut spending and taxes when Truman wanted to keep it. Reconcile the war lovers with rationing that occurred.
What is the basis of this statement? The economists I've read say that the US gov't didn't do enough in the 1930s (I'm not sure how much Congress and how much Roosevelt are to blame), as they lacked the political will to spend as much as was needed.
That's ridiculous. The problem going into the Great Depression was the monetary policy, which was tightened when it needed to be loosened. The problem going through the great depression, what made it really great, was the New Deal -- not today's political footballs like social security, but the radical restructuring of the American economy in a borderline Soviet wave of regimentation and anticompetitive cronyism. We don't think about this much today because it was mostly disassembled, but every so often you hear some story where the government wants to take farmers' raisins for a pittance of compensation (and the crop is at risk of spoiling). Or milk-price boards. Those are just the last lingering vestiges of the system at work, a system run with a mindset that they could drag the nation into prosperity again by burning crops in the time of famine (to support prices don't you know).
No I don't have a well-sourced essay for you. Go do some real Depression research. Look up work by multiple economists.
Re: The Lack of Major Wars May Be Hurting Economic Growth
#29One important point of the article is that war is good for innovation. In war, people unite around common goals, and are willing to sacrifice in a way that is impossible in peacetime.
Re: The Lack of Major Wars May Be Hurting Economic Growth
#30/shoddy
Lack of Discipline.
Lack of Honesty.
Lack of Charity.