Political Forums  

Go Back   Political Forums > Economy

We appreciate your help

in keeping this site going.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-29-2010, 12:21 PM
BlueStreak's Avatar
BlueStreak BlueStreak is offline
Area Man
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
WW2 as an economic model.

In recent months there has been a lot of talk about FDRs policies, WW2, the effects of these two things on the economy and how they relate to the current situation.

In the late 1930's defense production began to increase in order to meet the demands of the "Lend/Lease" program. By 1944 defense production reached levels previously unparalleled in human history. In the decades following the second world war, defense production dropped, but only briefly, as weapons had to be produced in order to maintain the arms race, and service the Korean and Vietnam wars.

Now, bear in mind, up until the late 1960s or so, the heavy industries of most of our international competetors, Germany, Japan, France, Italy, etc. layed in ruins.

This period from the late 1930s until the early 1970s or so, was also undeniably the most prosperous periods in American history. We had an economic expansion that was the envy of the world.

Now, I stand back and look at this era, and I can't help but wonder;

1) Could it be said that this model represents "massive government spending"?
And could the same result be acheived through "infrastructure" spending
instead of, or in addition to, defense spending?

IMO, Yes.

2) Could it be said that this model also represents "isolationism"?
Given the fact that our industries had little to no competition during
this era, and our government maintained steep import tariffs, I would have
say; "Yes".

However, with todays model of "Globalization" the game has changed a bit, hasn't it? Isolationism on the level of the 1950s would be far more difficult, if not impossible. But we can build and/or repair infrastructure, we can build schools and repair/expand our highways/railways/airports, etc.

So, maybe this "massive government spending", as scary as it sounds, isn't such a bad thing? So long as we spend the bulk of it domestically, rebuilding our cities, industries, and other things that benefit American citizens, that is.
And, by extension, buying the things that we must from other countries should help lift beleagured economies abroad as well.

Maybe if the current administration spent more time billing the "stimulus" as "investment", there wouldn't be as much uproar as we have today?

Just a thought.

Whadda ya say?

Regards,
Dave
__________________
"When the lie is so big and the fog so thick, the Republican trick can play out again....."-------Frank Zappa
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-29-2010, 12:47 PM
Zeke's Avatar
Zeke Zeke is offline
Sir Lord Vader of Cheam
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Lewiston, ID
Posts: 5,065
Send a message via Yahoo to Zeke
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Streak
Maybe if the current administration spent more time billing the "stimulus" as "investment", there wouldn't be as much uproar as we have today?
That's what they did.

"The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009."

(The turgid with bile Republicans were the smear campaign of fear: because their since-Reagan military spending cow might be gored. That and, well, they're idiots.)
__________________
"American" means calling everyone who disagrees with you a traitor?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-29-2010, 01:07 PM
piece-itpete's Avatar
piece-itpete piece-itpete is offline
Possibly admin. Maybe ;)
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Land of the burning river
Posts: 21,098
Curious - why hasn't the almighty Obama Pelosi & Reid (the three stooges) taken care of the military spending problem?

Anyway it doesn't quite hold up. For starters any tariffs at all, you get a trade war which would be disasterous for the economy. Second, there was so much pent up consumer demand after ww2, which we can't replicate.

I'd have a lot more respect for the porkulous bill if the majority of the dough actually went into infrastructure. I did indeed vote for a statewide levy a while back that was specifically earmarked for bridges and roads, but the politicos don't like that - it interferes with their handouts.

Pete
__________________
“How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.”
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-29-2010, 04:04 PM
Charles Charles is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,348
You can't spend yourself rich, especially when you're already broke.

We need to come up with a way to get industry up and running and people back to work producing wealth so we have a tax base. Government spending doesn't create wealth, it siphons it off.

Chas
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-29-2010, 05:01 PM
Zeke's Avatar
Zeke Zeke is offline
Sir Lord Vader of Cheam
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Lewiston, ID
Posts: 5,065
Send a message via Yahoo to Zeke
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles View Post
We need to come up with a way to get industry up and running and people back to work producing wealth so we have a tax base.
Then, we need either a war, or a nation or two to rebuild after we've pummeled them: whether they required it or not.

Oh, wait...
__________________
"American" means calling everyone who disagrees with you a traitor?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-30-2010, 02:13 AM
BlueStreak's Avatar
BlueStreak BlueStreak is offline
Area Man
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles View Post
You can't spend yourself rich, especially when you're already broke.

We need to come up with a way to get industry up and running and people back to work producing wealth so we have a tax base. Government spending doesn't create wealth, it siphons it off.

Chas
Really? Even when the "government spending" is directed towards private industry, in the form of orders for materials, goods and services required to build bridges, highways, etc. and then these facilities are then used by private industry? So, you would have me believe the Eisenhower Interstate Highway System has never been an asset to to industry and commerce? T.R.s Panama Canal a total waste of time and money that has never benefitted anyone? The Hoover Dam? The list goes on and on..........

This is the GOP that I miss. The GOP that builds. Whatever happened to them. When did they turn into the assholes that they are today, with all of this "NO YOU CAN"T!", "LET IT FAIL!", "AMERICAN WORKERS ARE LAZY AND OVERPAID!", etc., etc., ad nauseum?

That's what I want to know.

Dave
__________________
"When the lie is so big and the fog so thick, the Republican trick can play out again....."-------Frank Zappa
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-30-2010, 05:50 AM
noonereal noonereal is offline
Abby Normal
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 11,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeke View Post
Then, we need either a war, or a nation or two to rebuild after we've pummeled them: whether they required it or not.

Oh, wait...
how does spending on a war rather than infrastructure help us?

What were the economic benefits of Vietnam for example?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-30-2010, 11:17 AM
rickr15 rickr15 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles View Post
We need to come up with a way to get industry up and running and people back to work producing wealth so we have a tax base. Government spending doesn't create wealth, it siphons it off.

Chas
Not gonna happen as long as the Chinese,Koreans etc can make a finished part cheaper than an American firm can even buy the raw material.

If the Yuan was priced at what its really worth the trade deficit might ease a little and that would help.
__________________
The difference between intelligence and apathy?
I have no idea, and I couldn't care less.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-30-2010, 11:24 AM
Fast_Eddie's Avatar
Fast_Eddie Fast_Eddie is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 3,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by piece-itpete View Post
Curious - why hasn't the almighty Obama Pelosi & Reid (the three stooges) taken care of the military spending problem?
Gotta fix the wars before you cut the spending.
__________________
Two days slow. That's what they are.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-30-2010, 11:26 AM
Charles Charles is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickr15 View Post
Not gonna happen as long as the Chinese,Koreans etc can make a finished part cheaper than an American firm can even buy the raw material.

If the Yuan was priced at what its really worth the trade deficit might ease a little and that would help.
I would say you have a point.

Chas
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:59 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.