1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

The words of a Republican American President 45 years later. The Economy needs wars.

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Rik Meleet, Jun 6, 2007.

?

Does the US economy depend on war ?

  1. Yes, without a war once in a while the econmy would suffer.

    20.0%
  2. No, without a regular war the economy would not suffer

    71.1%
  3. I don't know / abstain / Radioactive Orca.

    8.9%
  1. Leonel

    Leonel Breakfast Connoisseur

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2001
    Messages:
    10,348
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    I think so to an extent. Technological progress requires war to make major jumps and nowadays technology is one of the primary drives for an economy. Sure technology would continue to progress without war but we'd probably be marveling at the wonders of jet power and super conductors today.
     
  2. Ramius75

    Ramius75 Deity

    Joined:
    May 5, 2003
    Messages:
    6,218
    Location:
    Sing City
    No, the whole US economy doesnt need to rely on war to keep it going. But instead, having Wars keep the pockets of a few individuals' pocket lined, the cronies, and those who owned stocks in defence industry.

    Having war also spur the needs to keep investing money into defence companies, creating demand for them to develop better killing weapons in order to win a war in the future. Without fear, the ppl will not agreed to the military spending USA is enjoying now.

    War only profit a fews.
     
  3. DNK

    DNK Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2007
    Messages:
    3,562
    Location:
    Saigon
    What I don't understand is why cuts in the military budget are regarded with such dismay. What's our current share of world expenditure on military now, 70%? I think we're safe for a while...

    Yes, obvious hyperbole on that last part, but it is ridiculously high, and with even a 50% cut, we'd still be pretty well off. I mean, we're basically isolated from our only potential rivals, Russia and China, by vast amounts of water. Whatever other actions are needed for regional struggles can be done through intermediaries (e.g. Israel, Japan) and wouldn't require nearly as much on our part. The only thing that I wouldn't agree to cuts on would be R&D, but beyond that I see a lot of unnecessary crap that can't even stabilize one country.
     
  4. Dann

    Dann Green bug

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,179
    Location:
    Shenzhen, China
    To a degree yes, because of the huge slice of the pie and great power enjoyed by the US weapons and armaments industry. But it need not be the US itself getting embroiled in a war. All that is needed is a market, and what it means is that there should always be wars somewhere else on the planet in order to inflate demand. A smarter (and more sinister) administration would have gone this route, but 9-11 threw a monkey wrench into the works...
     
  5. DNK

    DNK Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2007
    Messages:
    3,562
    Location:
    Saigon
    Innocent looking but devious. In that case we wouldn't even have to foot all the bill. I like it. And then we can have them pay our companies to clean everything up. No need to wrack up the national debt to $50 trillion or whatever.

    9/11 didn't throw a monkey wrench into the works, I think it was the 2000 electorate that did...
     

Share This Page