Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Afghanistan war
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wkmac" data-source="post: 669717" data-attributes="member: 2189"><p><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20100308031929/http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2010/01/military-industrial-compex-is-ruining.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: red">Here's</span></a> an interesting piece on our economy which discusses where in the economy an actual employment boom is taking place and the longterm effects of what is called the military-industrial complex has on the economy and the nation as a whole with these longterm growth prospects.</p><p></p><p>The first part of the piece does show the writer's bias in regards to foreign policy but then the writer delves into the economic numbers. If one has a bias towards fiscal responsible beliefs as I do, then one must ask, if it's true to remove assets from society's private sector to the public sector for public good projects and in each case one can also easily argue that these reallocations of resources go to distort the true economic market, then why is it not equally true in the case of warfare?</p><p></p><p>IMO this is at the heart of the writer's point which goes beyond any bias on war either way. From an economics standpoint, what are the true ramifications longterm and from an economic question, is it worth it and are there more cost effective means from a true fiscal viewpoint for the ultimate end of a secure and safe society?</p><p></p><p>In a role of expanding the current "war on terror" we are entering a 3rd (if not 4th when you consider Pakistan alone) in Yemen and the larger question is the means to pay for it all while allowing resources to remain in the private sector to further support a struggling recovery. And no, I'm not ignoring the many other areas in which gov't is stripping resources from the private economy and into the public domain for what really amounts to vote getting projects which both sides do equally well.</p><p></p><p>Since the 1850's, there has been no real serious true reduction in the national debt as per <a href="http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: red">TreasuryDirect</span></a> except for a couple of years in the 1950's when a few years saw very small drops in the midst of a boom cycle mostly brought on by the fact that most means of production in both Europe and Asia had been destroyed by war leaving America alone to fill global needs for the next 20 or so years until other regions emerged from it's ruins to begin to challenge back. We continue to use debt as a means of financing gov't interventions and at what point does the sustainability of this approach run out and the economic calamity follow?</p><p></p><p>History is ripe with large scale states crumbling economically while trying to defend it's geographic non-homeland interests against small, sometimes very small scale opponents who defeat the large states via economic ruin from within, not by physical destruction of an attack. The USSR being a perfect example in our most recent time and like Russia we now find ourselves trapped in the <a href="http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/57411/milton-bearden/afghanistan-graveyard-of-empires" target="_blank"><span style="color: red">graveyard of empires</span></a>.</p><p></p><p>When the credit line runs out and is closed, who among us would then support a nationalization of the entire economy for the express purpose of defending the State's interests abroad under the belief (real or phantom) of an external threat?</p><p></p><p>The State's purpose first and foremost is to survive and the illusion of freedom is only such now because it serves the State's ends of survival at this time. The moment freedom and democratic processes no longer serve as a help but rather as a hurt, the mask will come off for good.</p><p></p><p>I wonder why so many were twisting in their seats when Congressman Jack Brooks asked the all important question of one Ollie North?</p><p></p><p>[media=youtube]Ug0IL7k3elQ[/media]</p><p></p><p>BTW: For those who want to scream at Obama and Janet Naipolitano for the FEMA camps, then you need to also scream at the very people who put them in place for Obama and Naipolitano to use in the first place! Ironic is it not that so many of those folks then are your heros today. Seems some people need a serious clarification session with a mirror!</p><p></p><p><img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/FeltTip/wink.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":wink2:" title="Wink :wink2:" data-shortname=":wink2:" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wkmac, post: 669717, member: 2189"] [URL='https://web.archive.org/web/20100308031929/http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2010/01/military-industrial-compex-is-ruining.html'][COLOR=red]Here's[/COLOR][/URL] an interesting piece on our economy which discusses where in the economy an actual employment boom is taking place and the longterm effects of what is called the military-industrial complex has on the economy and the nation as a whole with these longterm growth prospects. The first part of the piece does show the writer's bias in regards to foreign policy but then the writer delves into the economic numbers. If one has a bias towards fiscal responsible beliefs as I do, then one must ask, if it's true to remove assets from society's private sector to the public sector for public good projects and in each case one can also easily argue that these reallocations of resources go to distort the true economic market, then why is it not equally true in the case of warfare? IMO this is at the heart of the writer's point which goes beyond any bias on war either way. From an economics standpoint, what are the true ramifications longterm and from an economic question, is it worth it and are there more cost effective means from a true fiscal viewpoint for the ultimate end of a secure and safe society? In a role of expanding the current "war on terror" we are entering a 3rd (if not 4th when you consider Pakistan alone) in Yemen and the larger question is the means to pay for it all while allowing resources to remain in the private sector to further support a struggling recovery. And no, I'm not ignoring the many other areas in which gov't is stripping resources from the private economy and into the public domain for what really amounts to vote getting projects which both sides do equally well. Since the 1850's, there has been no real serious true reduction in the national debt as per [URL='http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt.htm'][COLOR=red]TreasuryDirect[/COLOR][/URL] except for a couple of years in the 1950's when a few years saw very small drops in the midst of a boom cycle mostly brought on by the fact that most means of production in both Europe and Asia had been destroyed by war leaving America alone to fill global needs for the next 20 or so years until other regions emerged from it's ruins to begin to challenge back. We continue to use debt as a means of financing gov't interventions and at what point does the sustainability of this approach run out and the economic calamity follow? History is ripe with large scale states crumbling economically while trying to defend it's geographic non-homeland interests against small, sometimes very small scale opponents who defeat the large states via economic ruin from within, not by physical destruction of an attack. The USSR being a perfect example in our most recent time and like Russia we now find ourselves trapped in the [URL='http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/57411/milton-bearden/afghanistan-graveyard-of-empires'][COLOR=red]graveyard of empires[/COLOR][/URL]. When the credit line runs out and is closed, who among us would then support a nationalization of the entire economy for the express purpose of defending the State's interests abroad under the belief (real or phantom) of an external threat? The State's purpose first and foremost is to survive and the illusion of freedom is only such now because it serves the State's ends of survival at this time. The moment freedom and democratic processes no longer serve as a help but rather as a hurt, the mask will come off for good. I wonder why so many were twisting in their seats when Congressman Jack Brooks asked the all important question of one Ollie North? [media=youtube]Ug0IL7k3elQ[/media] BTW: For those who want to scream at Obama and Janet Naipolitano for the FEMA camps, then you need to also scream at the very people who put them in place for Obama and Naipolitano to use in the first place! Ironic is it not that so many of those folks then are your heros today. Seems some people need a serious clarification session with a mirror! :wink2: [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Afghanistan war
Top