Does the war in Iraq stimulate the economy?
-
-
Re: Okay, quick question.
not like world war 2 did. but yes It does in a way. -
Originally posted by GrandiagodComment
-
Re: Okay, quick question.
"A cost is a cost, no matter who bears it. A benefit is a benefit, no matter who gains it."
(To get it off my chest, Clinton inherited the economy but did not much improve it. Reagan was the last major improvement of the past 50 years and he looks like an ass for inheriting the mistakes of his predecessors, however, his deregulation has caused massive growth)
Government Produced Jobs: Lies! When the government says it's made more jobs (this happens often in times of war when it grabs the reigns of the market) it's really saying it's moved jobs around. Someone lost a job and got moved to another. It's like the production of Hondas; you can either build 'em in Detroit (shut up, I know) or grow 'em in Iowa. When you put the grain on a ship and push the ship out into the Pacific, it comes back with cars on it. Who cares where the cars came from, they're there. Then the Fed adds to tariffs, which makes fewer cars grown and more built. Farmers turn into mechanics. Jobs are made! Oh, wait...
The most obvious thing that the war has affected is oil prices. Did anyone else notice a sharp spike when the most recent Israel/Hezbollah flared up? It wasn't too much and hasn't lasted too long, but it was there.
Might we also look into travel. I have a feeling that the tourism in Beirut as well as Baghdad has gone down just a smidge. Look at the impact this has had on taxi drivers in the area. Immigration's gone crazy, too.
In short, there are always massive effects from war or conflict of any sort, however, not always are they obvious. If anything, the data show that the general domestic economy takes a small jump during periods of war. For certain, things do change. Investors are more cautious etc. However, since Econ focuses a lot on the Utility of GDP (NOT GDP ALONE) and Utility is just a fancy term for "happiness," it would be my guess that this war is going economically downhill.
I'm not just saying that because I'm opposed to it.
QLast edited by The_Q; 07-31-2006, 04:41 PM.Comment
-
Re: Okay, quick question.
I was thinking "Man, too bad Q doesn't frequent the board anymore" and then he appears. I'm eagerly awaiting his response.
Anyways, there is no way it would stimulate the economy similar to the way WW2 did as businessman said. We were in a huge depression at the time and all the newly created jobs and rationing was a big help. I'm pretty sure Bush has put the nation anywhere from 3 to 6 trillion dollars in debt, after Clinton helped us recover from one similar to that. The way the global market operates today, and where cheap labor comes from, I can't see that much of an influence on our domestic economy at all.Comment
-
Re: Okay, quick question.
Clinton didn't really help us recover from the debt too much; he just balanced the budget.
My main reasoning against the stimulation is that this war is just using primarily what we already had and that the things that we needed to produce were rockets and whatnot, which are contracted out to businesses that don't require much labor, let alone unskilled labor.
--Guido
Originally posted by GrandiagodComment
-
Re: Okay, quick question.
no it really doesnt.Comment
-
Re: Okay, quick question.
A few ways yes war is good for certain companies, but I'm sure there's someone who wil elaborate better than I can. If we are getting any oil out of this then oil companies, people who manufacture items for the US military, soilder jobs open. Is it a good way too stimulate the economy? No but thats just opinion.Spread C711 Metal ZX./
Comment
-
Re: Okay, quick question.
But at the same time, everyone off to fight in Iraq won't be able to work in the US, right?Originally posted by church_pkPatashu makes Chiptunes in Famitracker:
http://soundcloud.com/patashu/8bit-progressive-metal-fading-world
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v216/Mechadragon/smallpackbanner.png
Best non-AAAs: ERx8 v2 (14-1-0-4), Hajnal (3-0-0-0), RunnyMorning (8-0-0-4), Xeno-Flow (1-0-0-3), Blue Rose (35-2-0-20), Ketsarku (14-0-0-0), Silence (1-0-0-0), Lolo (14-1-0-1)
http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee301/xiaoven/solorulzsig.pngComment
-
Re: Okay, quick question.
Patashu, correct. What happens there is that there are fewer people are around to help with trade and infrastructure. Same issue comes around, though, when criminals are put into jail.
QComment
-
Re: Okay, quick question.
yes but some criminals do community service work, such as litter patrol, licence plate making, etc etc.Comment
-
Re: Okay, quick question.
I don't know, but by looking at the stock markets it doesn't seem to be. Especially looking at the Nasdaq
Comment
-
Re: Okay, quick question.
Because the stock market has always been the measurement of economic growth and is totally accurate.
If anything, look at records for GDP. It's the closest we can get to accurate measurements of utility (which cannot actually be measured because it's way too hard to calculate. GDP can be high with no utility, but that would require slave labor camps. Generally, though, we assume that the more stuff people have, the happier they are, the higher the utility, the better the economy).
The stock market reflects very little the effects of anything.
QComment
Comment