Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Would The U.S. Start A War To Stimulate The Economy?
The Market Oracle ^ | 11-16-2009 | Washingtons Blog

Posted on 11/16/2009 2:32:27 PM PST by blam

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-68 next last
To: blam

I would think infrastructure spending would have the same effect. I wouldn’t want the demons running it. But If I was pres, I would declare this country CLOSED FOR REMODELING! First, the energy system, Drilling for oil to help control the price of the market and the building of numerous nuclear power plants. 2nd, Transportation system we need more train travel in this country and more efficient mass trnsit in metro areas. This would reduce oil consumption. lastly, a water distribution system to mitigate the effects of drought on parts of the country.

Just some thoughts!


41 posted on 11/16/2009 3:08:36 PM PST by Always Independent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

Would The U.S. Start A War To Stimulate The Economy? No.
Would the marxist punk start a war to help his falling numbers? Maybe.


42 posted on 11/16/2009 3:09:36 PM PST by Joe Boucher (This marxist punk has got to go.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wolfpat

BINGO!


43 posted on 11/16/2009 3:09:57 PM PST by rocksblues (Sarah and Joe, Real Americans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: djsherin

Not so. A fellow can learn a new trade.


44 posted on 11/16/2009 3:12:14 PM PST by Scotsman will be Free (11C - Indirect fire, infantry - High angle hell - We will bring you, FIRE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane
If our National Debt has taught us anything, it is that our government thinks it can do it all and then some.

Good point.

45 posted on 11/16/2009 3:12:16 PM PST by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: marron

“As an aside, I think no one should be allowed to vote who hasn’t read Bastiat.”

That’s not a bad idea. Of course, limitations on the franchise are almost impossible to enact these days. Perhaps we could bypass civil rights issues by telling everyone he was black.


46 posted on 11/16/2009 3:12:38 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: wolfpat; NormsRevenge; Carry_Okie; hedgetrimmer; forester; Randy Larsen; Amerigomag; ...
Millions of Americans may get in the mood to declare war on this administration when they find our about THIS!!!
47 posted on 11/16/2009 3:17:46 PM PST by SierraWasp (AARP is guilty of Elder Abuse by endorsing a law that eliminates Medicare Advantaqe plans!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: blam

The spending required for most military action produces much more debt that needs to be repaid than it does growth. I can’t think of an era in history where a society has been successful in conquest out of the pockets of the citizens. I can think of many examples where much was financed from the pockets/resources of the fallen nations. We don’t have the national will to do that - just think of the widespread aversion to using Iraqi oil to pay for the war in Iraq. I think we need to do a much better job of clarifying what is genuinely in our national interests.


48 posted on 11/16/2009 3:27:59 PM PST by RochesterFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

Who are we going to fight? Eritrea?


49 posted on 11/16/2009 3:46:39 PM PST by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wolfpat

It’s uh, loaded question. If any country is weak it is likely to be attacked, at least before it’s more weaponized neighbors. Weakness invites aggression, not saying I like that. One of the attractions of America is the openness where everything doesn’t need to be locked up.


50 posted on 11/16/2009 4:01:02 PM PST by Freedom4US
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: blam

America, no. Obama, more than likely, as a war would give him an enemy to focus attention on, declare martial law, and suspend elections.


51 posted on 11/16/2009 4:08:31 PM PST by RWB Patriot ("Need has never produced anything. It has only been an excuse to steal from those with ablity.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hoosier hick; rabscuttle385
"I think there is ample evidence that military procurement provides a much bigger boost economically than distributing the same amount of money via social programs."

Have we really come to a mindset that says wars or social programs are our only feasible options to keep the economy rolling? Has the political debate come down to nothing more than which is better -- "America the Warmonger"? Or, a "Socialist America"?

Forgive me, but I really don't care which "stimulates the economy more", as we must have some better options for economic stimulus than just these.

America needs to spend enough on the military to protect herself, period. Any spending beyond that is waste, no matter how they want to package it as "good for the economy". Likewise, the social programs. Anything beyond that is theft.

This "military vs social programs choice" reminds me of a scene in the film Zorba the Greek where this woman is dying in bed while the villagers anticipating her death are shamelessly stealing all contents of the room where she'll breathe her last breath. And the villagers are fighting over her stuff. The woman can see it happening, but she is too weak to stop it, and the villagers don't care what she thinks because she can't do anything about it.

The dying woman in the film could reprensent the American taxpayer. The Libs and the necon politicians are the villagers stealing her stuff and fighting over how to use it: "Military!" "No, social programs!" "Gimme that!" "No, you give me that!" And it never occurs to any of the villagers/politicians just how outrageous their behavior is.

52 posted on 11/16/2009 4:12:12 PM PST by Bokababe (Save Christian Kosovo! http://www.savekosovo.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Always Independent

For what it’s worth... I like your ideas.


53 posted on 11/16/2009 4:35:45 PM PST by brooklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: BertWheeler

>>I know the big story is that WWII got the U.S. out of the depression but wasn’t it actually the post-WWII boom?

Many Austrian school economists would tell you that it didn’t happen until Eisenhower and the end of price controls and the effective use of the Taft-Hartley Act, which greatly weakened union strangleholds on business. It had been passed over Truman’s veto, but really needed a President to wield it to get the full business-friendly effect.


54 posted on 11/16/2009 5:26:08 PM PST by FreedomPoster (No Representation without Taxation!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: blam

You can’t get economy stimulus by spending money. Its a fallacy WAY too many economist hold, that somehow you create wealth by breaking windows then building it up again


55 posted on 11/16/2009 8:18:37 PM PST by 4rcane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

I thought we were in a war.


56 posted on 11/16/2009 11:38:48 PM PST by dixjea
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: randomhero97; LS

The US spends over 50% of the defense spending of the entire world.

The US + Europe + Japan + Canada + Australia + India spends on the order of 85% of the world’s defense budget.

Its higly probable that continuing to occupy S. Korea, Japan, Germany, Italy, etc. are not “vital” to American national security. Global American security through the use forward projection of power on existing American possessions only, especially Guam and Diego Garcia, would be immensely cheaper than the current deployment of forces, and would force a rethinking of the purposes of those forces and their size.


57 posted on 11/17/2009 6:36:45 AM PST by Heliand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

Admitting defeat before going out to war?

The US cannot afford this wastefulness.


58 posted on 11/17/2009 6:38:06 AM PST by Heliand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Heliand

While I think troops could be withdrawn from a number of spots, that’s not the budget issue and you know it. Nowhere close. “Entitlement” spending, Social Security, Medicare, and other idiocies are the central problem, and it doesn’t matter if taxes are “historically low,” they are ridiculously HIGH for the current business climate. I repeat, there is NEVER a time not to cut taxes.


59 posted on 11/17/2009 7:15:16 AM PST by LS ("Castles made of sand, fall in the sea . . . eventually." (Hendrix))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: BertWheeler
I know the big story is that WWII got the U.S. out of the depression but wasn’t it actually the post-WWII boom?

And we were the only industrial nation that wasn't devastated by WWII, giving us a huge competitive advantage for at least 20 years.

60 posted on 11/17/2009 7:21:32 AM PST by Night Hides Not (If Dick Cheney = Darth Vader, then Joe Biden = Dark Helmet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-68 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson