Nonsense. The U.S. had national rail service, a fully-connected telephone and telegraph grid, the planet's leading banking system, the planet's leading cryptographers, computer scientists, nuclear physicists, aeronautical engineers, machinists, commercial farmers, stock market, port system, canal system, research institutions, R&D funding, and overall a great educational system at the collegiate level even back then. I wasn't comparing the US to the rest of the world at that time, I was contrasting it with modern America.
Let me get this straight, are you arguing that the rest of the developing world will never be able to rival US technology in the 1940's ?
And your craven fear about our banking system collapsing either then or now truly isn't manly or realistic.
There isn't much I fear, Southack, financial turmoil isn't even close to making the list. It does annoy me that there isn't any stability analysis I can do on the world's financial markets. I do think folks like Soros have good points regarding cumulative financial instability in the "system". As an experimentalist, I say you have to shock them to find out.
What makes you fear the world so much? Didn't Howard Hughes gradually grow ever-more fearful as he withdrew from society? Don't make his mistake.
Thanks for the advice, but I'm not living in fear. I'm simply speculating on the future of military technology.
If it was the 19th century, and I was telling you the Africans would one day have Gatling guns, I don't see why I should be considered "fearful".
"Let me get this straight, are you arguing that the rest of the developing world will never be able to rival US technology in the 1940's ?"
Never? No, I wouldn't say that they will "never" reach our 1940's level.
But I don't really see so-called "developing" nations doing any development. A few of them can sell raw minerals and use that cash to buy ready-made devices, but I'm not seeing very many manufacturing or research projects being set up in the Middle-East, South-East Asia, Persia, or Africa.
The levels of disease, poverty, and starvation in the Third-World don't seem to be any better, and in several nations are decidedly worse, than what those same countries had 50 years ago. Going backwards is not going to get them to 1940's era U.S. levels anytime soon, either.
Perhaps someday at least one other nation will rise to the level of technical prowess demonstrated by the U.S. back in 1969 when we landed Men on the Moon, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that to happen anytime soon. Someday, sure. Not never, but not anytime soon.
Likewise, building nukes is achievable by 3rd world nations, but it isn't a gimme and probably won't happen very soon.
Which is good for them. After all, their societies won't survive the response to their first use of such a weapon.