psi29a wrote:I'm not sure who you are addressing here, as your argument doesn't address what I touched on. I was pointing out that since the Korean War, the USA hasn't paused for very long before getting itself involved militarily someplace in the world.
As one former director of the CIA put it, "When war becomes profitable, you will see more of them."
My point was that the US has not been involved in most of the Wars and military conflicts that have occurred since the Korean War. I simply pointed out conflicts the US wasn't involved in, rather than years. I will admit that the US does tend to make a fair profit when it is involved in a war indirectly (such as by selling arms); however, war itself is rather costly, not only in terms of capital, but also in terms of the social costs. A few select individuals can, theoretically, make a large profit from war, of course, although this rarely happens in practice. I'll get my girlfriend to explain it in detail some time (she's an Econ minor).
I still fail to see how the US not being involved in other wars has an increase in the US national debt. The sale of weapons to others helps the corporations but does not address the debt.
I iterate again, how does your statement make any difference to the US national debt?
You do that, I'll bring in killfile and vtwahoo, (he's has BS & BA, and she is a PhD candidate). You know, to help break it all down for us little guys.
Admittedly, I'm an armchair observer coming from a BS background.
Last edited by psi29a on Sat Dec 02, 2006 2:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
psi29a wrote:You do that, I'll bring in killfile and vtwahoo, (he's has BS & BA, and she is a PhD candidate). You know, to help break it all down for us little guys.
Admittedly, I'm an armchair observer coming from a BS background.
You aren't the only one. It's just been explained to me that war is usually a losing-money proposition for the US. It is entirely possible, however, that I've confused the US economy with the US government (war is obviously a losing proposition for the government), although it might be significant to note that the greatest periods of economic growth occured during times of relative peace (namely the late fifties/early sixties and mid to late nineties).
I think you would be extremly interested in this movie then. It covers a lot of ground I would recommend it to anyone interested US conflicts & her economy.
We must guard against the military industrial complex. -- President Eisenhower
america has made a business out of selling arms to countries in conflict.. it is a HUGE money maker for american enterprises... you name a conflict and america has supplied at least one of the parties with weapons.. sometimes both!
Sortep wrote:america has made a business out of selling arms to countries in conflict.. it is a HUGE money maker for american enterprises... you name a conflict and america has supplied at least one of the parties with weapons.. sometimes both!
Great for companies, no so great for national debt. So, while companies become more rich, the US citizen becomes more poor, because by extension... we are our Government.
Companies pay taxes, we citizens pay taxes. Guess who can better 'afford it'.
MonkWren wrote:My point was that the US has not been involved in most of the Wars and military conflicts that have occurred since the Korean War. I simply pointed out conflicts the US wasn't involved in, rather than years. I will admit that the US does tend to make a fair profit when it is involved in a war indirectly (such as by selling arms); however, war itself is rather costly, not only in terms of capital, but also in terms of the social costs. A few select individuals can, theoretically, make a large profit from war, of course, although this rarely happens in practice. I'll get my girlfriend to explain it in detail some time (she's an Econ minor).
This is obviously the fault of the communists, they're trying to start wars and make the US government take the blame. You know that Iraq War thingy? Communists started that shit, man. So why can't the US make some money on the side to rub it in the faces of those commie bastards? Bears and arms and shit. I have an ex-girlfriend who's a conspiracy theorist, I'll try to get her to post, but she probably hates me and spends her time plotting my demise.
I don't think half the toilet seats in the world are as clean as I should like; and only half of those are half as clean as they deserve. - tsubaimomo, July 26, 2010 3:00 am
psi29a wrote:Companies pay taxes, we citizens pay taxes. Guess who can better 'afford it'.
Quoted for truth, especially when there are so many loopholes that companies can use to avoid paying their full taxes. Not to mention the outright fraud, corruption, and all the other shit that goes down in Washington.
BTW, I hadn't seen that particular video, but I've seen similar stuff. I remember when Ben Cohen (of Ben and Jerry's "fame") presented at Congress. He dropped a marble in a bucket. Said that the marble was a nuclear warhead equivalent to the ones the destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki. He then poured a veritable rain of marbles into the same bucket. That was the US nuclear armament at the time. It costs us more money to simply maintain our nukes than the cost of the entire Education budget. :p
