Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsProof that War Is Bad for the Economy
http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/proof-war-bad-economyPreface: Many Americans including influential economists http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123008280526532053.html and talking heads http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/29/AR2010102907404.html - assume that war is good for the economy. Many congressmen assume that cutting pork-barrel military spending would hurt their constituents jobs. As demonstrated below, it isnt true.
Nobel-prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz says that war is bad for the economy http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/11/nobel-prize-winning-economist-war-is-widely-thought-to-be-linked-to-economic-good-times-nonsense.html : Stiglitz wrote in 2003: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2003/jan/22/iraq.economy
War is widely thought to be linked to economic good times. The second world war is often said to have brought the world out of depression, and war has since enhanced its reputation as a spur to economic growth. Some even suggest that capitalism needs wars, that without them, recession would always lurk on the horizon. Today, we know that this is nonsense. The 1990s boom showed that peace is economically far better than war. The Gulf war of 1991 demonstrated that wars can actually be bad for an economy.
Stiglitz has also said that this decades Iraq war has been very bad for the economy. See this http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,409710,00.html , this http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article3419840.ece and this
.
snip
And economist Dean Baker notes http://www.cepr.net/content/view/1157/77/ : It is often believed that wars and military spending increases are good for the economy. In fact, most economic models show that military spending diverts resources from productive uses, such as consumption and investment, and ultimately slows economic growth and reduces employment.
War Spending Diverts Stimulus Away from the Real Civilian Economy
The New Republic noted http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-stash/military-spending-fiscal-stimulus in 2009:
snip
--------------
much more at top link
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 2457 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (7)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Proof that War Is Bad for the Economy (Original Post)
stockholmer
Feb 2012
OP
As long as you are talking about "our" economy, yes. If you are talking about the
rustydog
Feb 2012
#2
libinnyandia
(1,374 posts)1. If only our leaders had listened to Eisenhower.
rustydog
(9,186 posts)2. As long as you are talking about "our" economy, yes. If you are talking about the
military contrator's (mercenary armies) economy, the oil producing corporation's economy, bankster's economy, Willard's economy, it is doing just fine and will continue to do so. Our economy sucks.
cbrer
(1,831 posts)3. WOW! An impressive amount
Of data. Unfortunately, it leaves out the part about war enrichening people who buy politicians. And employ lots of people who then (typically) vote Republican.
JNathanK
(185 posts)4. yah, read up on the Romans sometime n/t