Wars and the Economy
  • Zehir
    12
    In my previous post discussing about what is wealth, I read several times between the relationship of wars and the economy.

    The myth tells you that wars are good for the economy.
    This is just a misinterpretation. One one hand, you have an organized workforce and manpower working diligently as fear is "motivating" their output.

    However, think for a moment... Did nazi economy recovered from the war? the short answer is no, Nazi economy ceased to exist (indeed it was transformed, but no more slaves, no more military oriented economy). Industries? gone, manpower? gone, finances? gone.

    It is simple, Wars are good for the economy of the victorious. However, the overall industry of the world suffers. A net loss, that is what wars bring. Good for one, bad for the other.

    Do you think the US economy would have boomed after WW2 if the Nazis had won?
    Zehir Options
  • Nobeernolife
    556
    However, think for a moment... Did nazi economy recovered from the war? the short answer is no, Nazi economy ceased to exist (indeed it was transformed, but no more slaves, no more military oriented economy). Industries? gone, manpower? gone, finances? gone. — Zehir

    The whole Nazi country ceased to exist, so that is a bit of a weird argument.
    Nobeernolife Options
  • Zehir
    12
    ↪Nobeernolife

    That is the point of my argument. The dead cannot complain.
    Zehir Options
  • Nobeernolife
    556
    It is simple, Wars are good for the economy of the victorious. — Zehir

    The UK went into deep depression after WW2, while West Germany had it economic miracle, and East Germany continued to suffer. As you can see, there are other factors than just "winners" and "losers".
    Nobeernolife Options
  • Zehir
    12
    ↪Nobeernolife

    Yes, of course, because much of the industries were obliterated during the raids.
    I am discussing the myth that wars are good for the economy, just a misinterpretation as not all sections are read.
    Zehir Options
  • Nobeernolife
    556
    Yes, of course, because much of the industries were obliterated during the raids. — Zehir

    The most oblitered industries were in Germany, which (the Western sector) experienced one of the most amazing economic booms of all times.
    Ditto for Japan, by the way.

    Again, I am only pointing out that reality is not that simple.
    Nobeernolife Options
  • Echarmion
    2.7k
    It is simple, Wars are good for the economy of the victorious. However, the overall industry of the world suffers. A net loss, that is what wars bring. Good for one, bad for the other. — Zehir

    It's not even necessarily good for the victors. France and Britain won both world wars, but their economies (especially that of France and especially in WW1) suffered dearly.

    Wars usually stimulate the growth of industrial capacity. That is good if that capacity remains intact and you can use it afterwards. The problem is that much the actual industrial production goes up in flames, and that work could have been put to use improving lives instead of taking them.

    The most oblitered industries were in Germany, which (the Western sector) experienced one of the most amazing economic booms of all times.
    Ditto for Japan, by the way.

    Again, I am only pointing out that reality is not that simple.     — Nobeernolife

    A boom is a relative. It took Germany about 15 and Japan about 20 years to reach the pre-war GDP per capita outputs.

    In both countries, the destruction of the old, restrictive regimes was highly beneficial. Presumably, had that been achieved without a war, things would have been even better.
    Echarmion Options
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment