Obama launching World War 3 !!

[Going411x7]

Quite right.

I wasn't thinking about a World War as that's simply not a possible scenario in the near future. The wars that the US will engage in will all be variants of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Those are the ones that are both profitable to the military industrial complex and yet at the same time not destabilizing to the current world order.

.

I agree. Eisenhower warned us of this unholy alliance.

 

[ByggD]

I think you're on shaky ground, but I do agree with you. It is true that industrial output increases dramatically during global wars, which puts more money into the middle class. A net positive outcome. But you're right, eventually the money borrowed to fund the industrial surge must be paid back at a later date, possibly causing recession.

Hey, bud. How's it going? I am not sure why I am on shaky ground. Could you explain please. I mean, in the event of a global war we are going to need ammunition that cannot be reused. That ammunition is only going to destroy things; at the very least destroy itself. After it is made and sold, it is worth nothing. The bomb maker doesn't benefit anyone else. Whereas, say, a car maker benefits lots of people (car insurance, fuel, oil, filters, lights, washer blades, tires, radios, speakers, more fuel, convenient stores, athletic events--bus rides--etc.). When a bomb finally does go off someone is going to need death insurance (widow), health insurance, and pension, luckily the good ole tax payer will be there to take the hit though. Also, all of those soldiers that we send off to war will need retraining when they get back which costs businesses lots of money; unless they are going to carry an M-16 for the new Military State formerly known as the USA. War does not lead to a economic "boom" by itself. Maybe it seems that way because the USA can't stay out of wars. Fact: the USA spends 2 Billion a week on Afghanistan alone, how is that going for the USA? The US could sure use that money at home right about now.


This is an important fact, for now. Currently the Chinese leadership is composed of members from the technical classes (engineers, etc) who lead the country, as you would expect, quite conservatively. They will NOT go to war with the U.S. However, there will come a day when that leadership will succumb to the power-hungry, who may be more nationalistic, more aggressive. Already many in China see it's rise as simply a return to where China should be (historically, up until the European industrial revolution, China had been the single largest economy in the world for many centuries). The future leaders of China may decide, at some point, that putting the U.S. in it's place will be the best course of action.

.

I am too tired right now. Thanks for commenting on my post though. I hope I don't come off as angry in my posts. I am not angry and I enjoy these types of discussions. For now, I am going to bed. Thanks again for contributing to the conversation.

 

[mistydawn]

People, just look at history. Follow the money. Who profited from Iraq? Who profited from the financial crisis? Why is there a massive flow of money from the middle-class to the upper class? It's really easy to predict the future once you have identified the basics.
.

I don't deny one bit that many many people profited greatly from the Iraq war. The financial crisis was a bonus (litterally) for banks, lending companies etc. They f*uck up, fail, and we get the shaft.

PS. I was talking a world war.

 

[mistydawn]

Sorry, but you are just factually wrong when you say there will not be increased U.S. employment in the event of world war. I think we are talking about two different issues - you're mostly talking about Big Dick Cheney and the way we literally destroyed Iraq and then rebuilt it with his company. Very convenient for Dick. This was not world war. In the event of actual world war, jobs will be created.

:agree:

 

[User235]

I don't deny one bit that many many people profited greatly from the Iraq war. The financial crisis was a bonus (litterally) for banks, lending companies etc. They f*uck up, fail, and we get the shaft.

PS. I was talking a world war.

You are right, war can help economies, but eventually all that spent hardware has to be paid for, with our tax dollars. And those dollars now can't be used for infrastructure, education nor technology - all things that can grow an economy. However, world wars can change America's place in the world, which greatly benefited us after WW2. So you have a point about wars helping economies.

I just think that any war will probably not help the middle class, but instead will greatly enrich corporations and their shareholders. We don't live in a 1950's America anymore. The wealthy take a much, much larger share of the GDP then they used to.

 

[mistydawn]

We don't live in a 1950's America anymore.

My parents did. What a great time to live in America! They also came from a small town to that made it even more ideal. One downer was women didn't have all they do today. My mom didn't marry her high school sweetheart because she was gonna go to college. Her boyfriend wasn't. Back then a girl did not outshine her husband. She broke up with him.

Cute thing is he still pines for her to this day!! I tease her about it.

I went off course here but when she mentioned the 1950's it made me think of this.
America was great. A good time to be alive and growing up. :usa2:

 

[Total_Honesty]

My parents did. What a great time to live in America! They also came from a small town to that made it even more ideal. One downer was women didn't have all they do today. My mom didn't marry her high school sweetheart because she was gonna go to college. Her boyfriend wasn't. Back then a girl did not outshine her husband. She broke up with him.

Cute thing is he still pines for her to this day!! I tease her about it.

I went off course here but when she mentioned the 1950's it made me think of this.
America was great. A good time to be alive and growing up. :usa2:

We had the same problems then as we do now, but it's magnified more by the constant stream of information we get from the internet and such.

 

[mistydawn]

We had the same problems then as we do now, but it's magnified more by the constant stream of information we get from the internet and such.

Can you please elaborate? I don't see how this response is to what I posted.

 

[wind chill]

Cancer Surges In Body Scanner Operators; TSA Launches Cover-Up
TSA idiots finally started to wake up after they started dying of cancer.I dont feel sorry for them cause they took the paycheck to put their hands into other peoples pants.

 

[Closed039]

Hey BygD, I appreciate the rebuttal. I don't quite know how to respond to all of your hypothetical situations. All I can say is this: In true world war, the US really flourishes. It is a sad fact but we have the manpower and technology to be a supplier of weapons and what not to all of our ally's armies. A true world war would result in a draft, thus most males 18-25 would be in some branch of our military. This will reduce unemployment, however temporarily and falsely as you mentioned, but it is reduce nonetheless. It is also a sad fact that many of those men do not return, and in that respect unemployment may go down for a bit longer than "temporarily." The 18-25 year old males are also the demographic with the highest propensity to commit crimes.
Furthermore, the women will be called upon, just like in WW1 and WW2, to take up the slack that men have left behind. They will be employed in factories and the like. Perhaps to a lesser extent than in the 40s - but it will happen.
You are right about consumerism and education. Those will suffer DURING WAR. People will not have the luxury to buy non-essential items, nor will they be able to get the education of modern times. These are realities of war.
But I believe that when the war does end, the men will come back and fuck the women like no tomorrow, hence the baby booming. The housing market will recover as everybody rushes to settle down (aka Levittown if you know anything about Long Island). The demand for housing will probably even exceed houses available, thus construction companies (and painters, electricians, etc.) will flourish. And so it is that, a few years after the war is over, those college institutions and small businesses selling the non-essentials will recover. They'll probably be the last to do so and are a sign that all is right in the economy...

I could be way off base. The fact is that nobody does know what would happen. I'm just pretty much explaining why our economy boomed after the last world war and I don't see why it would be THAT much different if we had one today.

 

[User235]

I went off course here but when she mentioned the 1950's it made me think of this.
America was great. A good time to be alive and growing up. :usa2:

My parents told me what a great time it was then too. I think it was a time where it seemed like the sky was the limit, that there was nothing America could not do, and no wrong that couldn't be fixed. But I've been reading some books about that era and it turned out there were a lot of things we weren't told about. But for people living then it was a wonderful era!

 

[User235]

Why is it that this forum is such an interesting place to talk about these issues? Anyone else notice that or is it just me? It seems like there are many people who like to think in this forum. As opposed to the normal political blogosphere where there seem to be so many idiots around!

 

[Closed039]

We're exercising our brains as well as our penises here.

 

[mistydawn]

This forum is wonderful! We do think here. As far as political, we have them all here...liberal, progressive, conservative, libertarian and ones not given a name yet. We have the idealists, realists and those with their head in the sand. This is a fantastic forum.

Yeah, back in the 1950's the public wasn't told much. They had faith. People were better to each other. Companies had some morals and ethics (better than none like now). Society had some standards. Now it is anything goes. If you don't like it, don't look. I find it sad. I know I would have never made it well in the 50's. I'm too wild. Too strong willed for a woman in those times. I probably would have joined a circus.

 

[Total_Honesty]

Can you please elaborate? I don't see how this response is to what I posted.

It refers to the comment you made about the 50's. I meant that the world hasn't much changed since then. Sure, technology and such has improved, but we are still the same human beings we were 20, 30, 100 years ago. The same problems existed back then as they do now, it's just that with the advent of the internet, every little thing gets blown up to smithereens. The problem is that you are looking at it from a nostalgic point of view.

 

[Total_Honesty]

This forum is wonderful! We do think here. As far as political, we have them all here...liberal, progressive, conservative, libertarian and ones not given a name yet. We have the idealists, realists and those with their head in the sand. This is a fantastic forum.

Yeah, back in the 1950's the public wasn't told much. They had faith. People were better to each other. Companies had some morals and ethics (better than none like now). Society had some standards. Now it is anything goes. If you don't like it, don't look. I find it sad. I know I would have never made it well in the 50's. I'm too wild. Too strong willed for a woman in those times. I probably would have joined a circus.

I got to admit, the views from other people here are interesting to say the least.

I disagree on that one comment about companies. Companies had less standards then than they do now. Now, they have rules and regulation to help the workers and to give out better products. Back then, if a worker in a lard factory fell in a vat of fat, they would still continue to sell the lard without doing a thing. Now, they have ways to prevent that from happening.

People were nicer then than now? I think some minorities might disagree with you on that one. Even though I think people are just as racist then as they are now, they didn't hide it back then. They called whoever they didn't like whatever racist comment they could think of. If the love of your life was a different color/creed than you were, then you couldn't do anything with your lover in public.

 

[mistydawn]

I got to admit, the views from other people here are interesting to say the least.

I disagree on that one comment about companies. Companies had less standards then than they do now. Now, they have rules and regulation to help the workers and to give out better products. Back then, if a worker in a lard factory fell in a vat of fat, they would still continue to sell the lard without doing a thing. Now, they have ways to prevent that from happening.

People were nicer then than now? I think some minorities might disagree with you on that one. Even though I think people are just as racist then as they are now, they didn't hide it back then. They called whoever they didn't like whatever racist comment they could think of. If the love of your life was a different color/creed than you were, then you couldn't do anything with your lover in public.

I don't agree with that. There are more safety standards but I don't see that as all good. Government getting more involved making profits on all the codes and inspections. The sue happy mentality has made standards for everything go overboard. I do not agree our products are better. Companies plan for some little small thing not worth fixing to go faulty and then you go out and buy another. We have cheap china quality items now. No quality.

Minorities still say we are all racist. The whole white man keeping him down. I agree back in the 50's if a black man looked at a white woman he could suffer for that. Now days, it is everyone being called racist...not then!!!!

 

[CUSP82]

There has been a few mentions of corporations getting richer on this thread. Isn't that what we want? Sure the bosses will take some of that new wealth for themselves but wouldn't they use the rest to make their comapanies bigger ( which gets them even richer) and therefore people will get jobs?

 

[mistydawn]

There has been a few mentions of corporations getting richer on this thread. Isn't that what we want? Sure the bosses will take some of that new wealth for themselves but wouldn't they use the rest to make their comapanies bigger ( which gets them even richer) and therefore people will get jobs?

They are not hiring more. They use less people giving them more work and paying less or the same.

 

[CUSP82]

Do you think they're not hiring because they don't want to or might they be afraid of our current economic problems coupled with the future looming costs of what health care will cost them among other things. All I know is a single human being working at full capacity can only produce soo much. I cannot get him to produce more than his physical limit. If I want to make more product to sell and get richer I have to hire someone else. If I don't know what my future cost might be than I don't hire anyone for now until I ascertain what those future cost will be ( because I don't want to go broke) so maybe it's all the uncertaintity the politicians are creating that is killing jobs.