War with Iran would rescue economy!

Well! another war would certainly boost the military complex and big oil corporations with a temporary injection into the economy, but since their corporate trickle-down-economics is not more than a fairy-tale from these same Corporations , I very much doubt that it would an economic boost for the fundamental economy of America in general.

The Fat Cats & Banksters and certain elite stock-holders would definitely be very happy though!

The only thing that can solve our Global economic crises, worldwide - would be If banks start lending again, but not with money for speculation nor the casino economy - but real investments for high tech company startups in fields where we can compete with China.

One such field of bussines could perhaps be to build up a high-tech-green infrastructure to develop real solutions and know-how, which we then can export and sell to the dirty manufacturing plants & factories, and for the growing cities in China and Asia.

Because - let's fact it! - basic manufacturing and production of goods will never come back to the west at the same levels, as it was, again, in any near future.

And the good ol' oil based economy is soon completely dead and buried - my bet would be around 2030.

The West's best hope in the global economy of the future is to be the developers & suppliers of new sustainable high-tech-solutions and new cleaner energy solutions, inventions and know-how to China & the rest of the growing Asian markets - the world's factories.

Or, we can ditch the global economy all together and build something else - but how are we gonna do that? strikes? revolutions?

I do see a potential external major conflict as a primary boost for the economic situation.. and in that regard any external boogy man will do ( we have a few already lined up).. An external conflict will also redirect internal strifle/tension onto the same boogy man.

IMHO an external conflict fullfills 2 goals of any establishment, maintain their wealth and keep the peasants under control, and thus seems very probable within a 12-18 month time frame..

The timeline I see works to the time it takes for the pain of the economic situation to spread across society as a whole, and for that pain to build up to the point that people consider getting off the bottoms and actually do something.

The establishment (globaly) seem to have left themselves very few option in terms of wealth creation to negate the above from happening. While If we (that is the world as a whole) continue down the path we seem to be stuck on (jobless recovery, wealth transfer to the rich) it'll end in some form of revolution** to drive us out of that rutt.

** Revolution doesn't have to be violent, could be spiritual, emotional, technological one..

The establshment know that'll happen and in my opinion are setting up some guys to take the fall to prevent the above happening, it is in my opinion (short of them releasing some new tech) about the only option they have left themselves.

reply to post by torqpoc


Everything is related to the cost of war. Taxes being number 1. Every time the feds decide its ok to tac on another 60 billion for some tanks or for some more troops to go over seas who do you think gets saddled with that bill? It comes out of the tax payer. Cigarettes, alcohol, soda, property, oil, ect. have all gone up since the war started.

1.1 trillion is what its costed so far in war expenses alone. If you add up the overall increase in price raises and the already de-stabilized American economy, the cost rapidly goes much higher.

The Iraq war didn't just contribute to the severity of the financial crisis, though; it also kept us from responding to it effectively. Increased indebtedness meant that the government had far less room to maneuver than it otherwise would have had. More specifically, worries about the (war-inflated) debt and deficit constrained the size of the stimulus, and they continue to hamper our ability to respond to the recession. With the unemployment rate remaining stubbornly high, the country needs a second stimulus. But mounting government debt means support for this is low. The result is that the recession will be longer, output lower, unemployment higher and deficits larger than they would have been absent the war.

Source: Washington Post

So all in all the current war we're in hasn't stimulated ANY economic growth. And running into another one will be like pounding the final coffin nail into the coffin.

Rattle off all the contracts you want but the reality of it is that there is no economic gain from America extending its reach into Iran.

reply to post by W3RLIED2


Dear W3RLIED2,

I am not sure if you misunderstood me, or just choose to not understand what I am saying.

My first response stated: War has been used for centuries to recover falltering industry, financial gain and global positioning

I then replied to you stating: Iraq did definately boost western economies. It created numerous jobs, got western construction and infrastructure companies work and one can argue it was all about rights for oil production.

I think that is where the issue of misunderstanding may have come from and for that I apologise, however I stick by my statement that War has financial incentives. That does not explictly mean it is good for the entire US economy. I never said that, I perhaps was not specific enough for you, again apologies, but I thought by specifying the specific sectors of financial and economic growth I was being quite direct. Maybe I should not have written "western economies" because that is misleading, I agree.

For the record, I agree with you and the statement you made. But please don't take my statements out of context. Now unless you had not noticed, the people who instigate war for their own purposes do not give a hoot about your taxes, your cost of living and how your countries economy is doing. They care about their wealth and keeping it. Those are the people I refer to as having financial incentives with war.

As to your last statement: Rattle off all the contracts you want but the reality of it is that there is no economic gain from America extending its reach into Iran.

You're wrong, there is huge economic incentive for specific companies. (We're back to my ealier statement)

Regards,
T

Death At A Discount

Originally posted by CitizenNum287119327
the cost to the us of its foreign policy is whats screwing the US. 50% of the budget is defense.

Actually, it's about 23%, while entitlements (Social Security, Medicare, et al) run about 56% (source).

That's still a hell of a lot of money (about a trillion dollars), and much more than I'd like to see spent, but it's not half.

reply to post by torqpoc


I understand what your saying, that specific companies will have economic incentive and maybe open up a few extra jobs. I was referring to the broad spectrum of average people... who aren't involved with the defense industry and wall street. Another war won't help us at all.

Please don't mistake my responses to you as confrontational. I think the OP was generalizing the 'economy' and not targeting specific companies. Either way facts are the same.

Broder is correct in some cases if the money game is played correctly. The US dollar is so massively out of proportion to the rest of the world that we're unable to compete with them because it's too expensive for us to manufacture and export any goods.

Currently we carry in our wallets fractional marks which is basically a fancy way of saying that $1 isn't really actually worth $1 in gold value. The only way for America to begin to compete with the rest of the world on a manufacturing and exportation stance is to drive the American dollar into the ground so that it's "inexpensive" to produce a product here. This would in turn "hopefully", and I use that term loosely, generate jobs in most markets as Off-shore outsourcing has become a major contributor to jobs not being available here. This will lead other countries to outsource here or those companies currently outsourcing offshore would finally start outsourcing on-shore.

So basically war with Iran would "force" us to print more fractional marks driving our dollar into the ground. Because we can produce products with better quality than anywhere in the world we have just regained our competitive edge and other countries will outsource to us.

You and I are the ones that suffer however because as the dollar value plummets and food prices rise we're still making our measly $7.50 per hour at minimum wage. Which means we will have essentially become a country that we've been trying to help over the past decade and people will start to starve unless they band together and grow their own food.

reply to post by Big Raging Loner
Big Raging Loner,

The top dogs get what they want, yes it will happen and they also want a hell of a lot of people annihilated and that will happen also. That's why they've dug into the mountains giant holes and resourses for them to dwell in while the fur flies.

Truthiron.

Who the F does this guy think he is to even suggest something that asinine?

Does this columnist think that US troops are Americas collectors? March off to war, potentially start WW3, just to save an economy that could be remedied by enforcing the law?

David Broder, listen up:

We have fraud permeating the entire system. From Wall St. to K St. What we need is for the cops to show up and start handing out shiny bracelets for criminal activity that caused this mess to begin with. Make them pay restitution, make them serve their time, only when this effort is started can the economy even begin to heal. We must force the fraud to the front and shine a light on it. It will be painful, but certainly less painful than playing with the lives of Americans and Iranians just for that proverbial bottom line.

War does not a sound economy make. War is the signal that the system is coming to a screeching halt, as the government sees no other way to maintain control than to send young people to die for their mistakes. War is a sign that the wheels are coming off the bus- And the smartest guys in the room have run out of ideas.

Mr. Broder, you should be ashamed of yourself.

reply to post by projectvxn


Projectvxn, While I agree with you on all accounts I think that these goons in office have more smarts than you're giving them credit for. The problem is that they know they can get away with murder because they've done it countless times over. They have counted on this cyclical method. They have hoarded tons and tons of money only to drive the value of the dollar down with printing more fractional marks. They are still the most powerful people in the country and the money means that they can buy up all the land they want once the crunch is over.
This also takes care of the over population issue as it introduces population control. It's a sick game they're playing but it's a reality that we have to live with. There has been many times that population control has been approached albeit with feathered gloves but it has already been brought up in congress. This is simply a quick and effective way to hit two birds with one stone while skirting both issues in the general public's eye.

reply to post by Stryker Ops


We don't "have to live" with this "reality".

We must reject this kind of twisted ideology if we are to survive as a nation.
I don't care if they are the ones "in control". They don't just get to make life
and death decisions predicated on economic conditions. It is WRONG.

And no one should just accept it because of a misguided notion that we should
just play the cards we're dealt and hope they haven't stacked the deck.

reply to post by projectvxn


I 100% whole-heartedly agree. The problem is that these people have everything wrapped so tightly that the masses believe that they are being fed truth. I guess the real question that should be asked to everyone is:

"If you knew beyond a doubt that there was a secret organization bent on reducing the population by over 1.3 billion people and putting reproductive constraints on the rest of humanity, but could not prove any of it, How far would you go?" I know how far I would go but don't have the support that is needed.

Take a look at these two links.

Global ObamaCare and World Population Control

Bill Gates Mentions Population Reduction in Seminar - Look at last 40 Seconds of presentation to the meat and potatoes of this claim.

reply to post by projectvxn

There is a seriously ill aspect to our culture. As long as we continue to value money/resources more then the gift of life, we will continue on the path of self destruction. I believe we have to truly reflect on ourselves, the world around us, and restructure our priorities. We need to open our eyes and see what is really important. Materialism has warped our sight. We look at living, feeling, breathing beings as objects to be exploited for material gain. We look upon life as an inanimate object, so we don't feel the guilt from "collateral damage". The end never justifies the means. Or course it isn't that simple, or easy, but I believe we could do a hell of a lot better then we are doing now.

The change has to start with us...

In my life I have suffered extremes of poverty, where my sister and I were lucky to get cheese with our beans on toast of an evening, where a slap up meal meant fish fingers, where our milk was watered down so that we could save a penny or two. I have lived on the streets, concrete as my mattress, and the verges at the side of roads as my four walls.
Things are better for me personaly now, but I can tell you this for certain:

If my remaining financialy solvent, means that a government I do not respect, has to send my countrymen to another land with murder in thier hearts, JUST to save our ecconomy, then I would rather be bankrupt, or rather, I would rather be bankrupt financialy , than moraly. I believe that to have a different opinion than this would be evidence of selfishness, greed, fear, and ethical retardation on a grand scale. We humans have been slaying eachother with gay abandon over matters ranging from the philosophical to the fiscal for as long as records have existed, and although I am often one to speak out in favour of tradition, and in favour of ancient times, and thier simplicity, on this matter I believe that we MUST advance beyond our pre established habits if we as a species are to survive.
Money is very important to all of us, it pays our rents and our mortgages, it pays for our power, it pays for our towns and cities,and our roads, and our food and everything that we consume at a cost. But it must never be allowed to become so important that nations would make war to gain it. Money is not worth the human cost, the sacrifice of hundreds of thousands of trained destroyers, and the sacrifice of millions of untrained , non combatant victims on the altar of war which we have so recently been all to ready to recoat in the blood of the innocent. As a species we must move on from this point with a clear, universal message, heralded by every nation . Fight only for freedom, never for finance.

reply to post by TrueBrit


And how morally bankrupt do you feel the establishement really is?

I personally see nothing in their actions at any point of the political spectrum that indicates they have left themselves any other option, that is if they where really looking for other options.. We are 2 years into this and I see no schemes coming to fruition.. it seems they have done nothing more than buy time.. time for what? where they expecting some miracle to come along.. or planning something else.

In my mind if they where looking for other options there would be a myriad of tangible wealth creation schemes happening, I would expect to see some failures and some successes, but I would expect to see something.. perhaps they would still be in their infancy, but they would be happening. How else (in the UK alone) are they going to cope with the expected 1mil additional redundancies that are in the works..

Thats 1mil additional strain on the social net, and 1 mil less tax payers.. and we need more tax payers to repay the debt we are in and spread the pain, while the fewer tax payers will simply concentrate the pain on them.. either way not a good position to be in.

It does not matter if we do/do not have a bloated Gov, those losing their jobs (gov or otherwise) still need jobs to go to.. still need to pay their rent, put food on their tables and pay taxes.. but the establishment seems to have no plans to cope with that.. no plans to create the wealth needed to employ those people, no plans to create the wealth to repay the debts we have accued, and no plans beyond today's cuts.

I can not help but have a sneaky feeling that the path they have set us on will be one that has a major conflict planned along the route..

reply to post by thoughtsfull


Oh I agree in so far as this is the course it seems that the goverments of the western world have set themselves towards. However, I do not SUPPORT that idea, and will act against its outworking if it comes down to it.
You refer to the situation here in Britain and it is an interesting one. David Camerons ConDem (really read that word and tell me what you get) coallition has manouvred itself into the unenviable position of effectively making 82,000 London residents (thats householders, rather than the total amount of people actualy being effected) homeless by capping Housing Benifit at four hundred pounds. This will put all but the most delapidated accomodation, even a two bedroom appartment, well beyond the reach of most of the working public. The people being effected by this cap, are not jobless benifit cheats, not leeches and vagabonds with no vision or direction, but the very people who drive the buses, the cabs, who deliver goods , provide services , clean pavements, empty bins, police the streets , stack the shelves and polish the fixtures and fittings of the grandest city on this isle. They and thier families are being unfairly dealt with, while bankers are paid obscene amounts (AGAIN) and while those who have had the good fortune, to be extremely well off, continue to entirely fail to feel the effects of the cuts the Conservative/Liberal Democrat monster has unleashed.
I say this. Until the sickeningly well off have had thier pointless hoardings rifled for spare un used cash, and until the multi millionaires in parliment have proved thier solidarity with the people, by giving up eighty percent of thier money (still leaving them with a fortune that an average every day joe would bounce up and down on puppies for) there can be no excuses for attacking the residents of London. But , even IF every other avenue down which revenue might flow to the UK government were exhausted, and no more money were to be in the system, I would still oppose a war march based on nothing but ecconomic need. I would rather starve to death, would rather see my loved ones turn to dust and be blown away on the breeze, than have the blood shed by greed, on my hands by proxy.

A war with Iran would be suicidal to the US. I've come to this conclusion based on the fact that Iran has gained popularity within the world community and the thought that the US could even suggest starting a war with Iran is beyond disbelief.

A war with Iran = World War III. The mere suggestion on going to war with Iran to boost the economy so Obamas popularity will go back up is a sign of severe mental disability.

There are other ways to boost the economy and it doesn't take putting our soldiers at any more risk. The wars in Iraq and Afganistan should've been over years ago. You can't fight a war with our troops hands tied behind their back and that's exactly what our politicians are doing to our troops.

What used to be a mad, mad world is now a sad, sad world. Really.

War does boost parts of the economy, a popular war may even boost an economy across the board. However in this case and the last case and in every case since world war II, that boost has been followed by a return to sluggishness and most often accompanied by a massive increase in debt.

It's one thing to wage war when you have a heap of gold in your treasury. You trade your gold and men for some sort of gain that is intended to improve your society in some measurable, long term way.

It's quite another thing to fight a war when you are $14 trillion (just cash) in the hole, with the intent to "stimulate the economy". What we would get is a few years of stimulation, with the vast majority of the wealth going to a few key executives or owners in the defense industry. The debt accrued to pay those people for all the missiles, planes, bombs, bullets, tanks, food, water and such, would be left for the tax payers of the nation to pay off.

It's another case of trading my future and your future, so a few over paid, under worked, gluttons can make of with public monies...

reply to post by TrueBrit


I certainly was not suggesting that you supported the idea, and I hope I did not give the impression that I did..

My partner and I have 2 teens (18yo) who would be caught up in such a mess... at the moment both have only just managed to scrape into education.. otherwise I am not sure what would happen to them..

The same goes for the cap here, it is not just London, towns like Brighton are stupidly expensive places to live.. the rent here is obscene and I am sure this move will affect many locally, so I do know where you are coming from.

But, my specialism as a project manager is change management and process engineering.. (at multinational level) so when I look at what is happening with my process head I see we are heading in a direction that means we are shedding jobs/losing tax payers while at the same time we have no wealth creation schemes in place to replace those tax payers we lose..

The issue is that with a smaller pool of taxpayers the pain/burden of repayment is spread unevenly.. so we need wealth creation scheme to maintain the pool of taxpayers to spread the burden/pain across society.. without that we will see some resort to drastic action.. and the establishment must know this.. which is one of the points that bugs the hell out of me.

If I was to run a change management project this way it would fail within 12 months.. and it would fail due to the human element.. which is what I can see happening here and the same human element causing the failiure.

Tho from expereince when someone creates a project that is going to fail it is usualy (generalisation here) becuase something else is actually going on, over the years I have got used to multinationals playing such games across continents, and have learned to spot the projects that are ducks and avoid them..

The current UK gov is a duck, and so are a number of other western govs.. the issue for me is what are their plans if they know the current situation can not be sustained for long and I can not help but feel we are running out of alternative directions..

It seems a toss up between internal or external conflict. while the first leaves the establishments neck on the block, I can not help but feel the only thing they have up their sleeve now is an external conflict.

Personally I pin my hopes on an internal revolution that is non violent and brings peace to us all (I am a dreamer)... but somehow I doubt the establishment would allow that to happen.

Well I expected to see a load of Gung Ho Posts following this assinine idea. I am so glad that even those I usually disagree with are saying this MAY benefit TPTB. The rest of us will suffer. May it never happen!