ELEPHANT-DONKEY.com

Jesus Christ, Lovejones. You're not doing any favors for your "side" here. At the same time, I disagree with Arubz15. McCain has consistently expressed an inclination towards war, whether it be in regards to North Korea or "bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran." The Iraq War DOES harm our economy in the same way that any other gross deficit spending hurts our economy; it weakens the dollar, limits the government's ability to respond with fiscal and monetary policy, and builds up an ever-increasing interest that we have to pay off year after year. In 2007 alone, we (taxpayers) paid $412 BILLION dollars just in interest alone. With the Iraq War raising the debt by trillions, it only limits our ability to right the economy even further.

Pyronite | 04/08/08

Yes, I agree that war, like other spending, creates debt in the economy. I was simply arguing against the point that the war is the single cause of the recession. War, however, also creates military and manufactoring jobs for U.S. citizens, so I would argue that it can be viewed in both ways. I realize that McCain does support the war, but do not agree that he is simply doing so because he enjoys war and death (which constitutes a warmonger).

arubz15 | 04/08/08

A warmonger does not necessarily conduct war because they enjoy war and death, but I do agree with you on that point; I do not believe McCain "enjoys" it, just that he sees it as an earlier solution than it should be. In regards to the war helping our economy, unfortunately this war isn't doing too much of that. They are not producing the kinds of goods that translate into systemic growth, nor are they building an industrial base of support for our workers, ala World War 2.

Pyronite | 04/08/08

I'm very open to people's opinions about the war; debating these topics helps create new ideas and expose mistakes taken by the government. Either way you see the war, there are negative consequences of leaving and staying. Leaving now risks allowing the Iraqi government to collapse into a state which is even more anti-American and radically Islamic. Staying, however, also leads to increased debt and death. From viewing the effects of leaving Vietnam and the Gulf War, I base my opinion in favor of staying until, and only until, the Iraqi government is stable enough to support itself. I wasn't alive during Vietnam, however, and may have some misconceptions of the events unfortunately.

arubz15 | 04/08/08

Pyronite, war never causes a production of goods that translate into sytemic growth. Think about it, what does a bomb do? It explodes. What's used to make a bomb? Money. What's the connection? Exploding money. So no war never helps economies. The U.S. did so well after WWII because we were sitting over here isolated without any damage to our infrastructure, while the rest of the World was digging through the rubble.

ShawnF | 04/09/08

Shawn, you are sorely mistaken about war translating into growth. Following World War II the government invested heavily in manufacturing and technology. DURING WWII (not "after") the size of the U.S. economy roughly doubled -- the fastest period of growth in U.S. history. Now, I agree that the state of our infrastructure played an important part post-World War II, but the sudden influx of government money into the manufacturing and work sectors is something that we didn't have prior to World War II, though the defense spending is something we have kept ever since. That is the reason why World War II had such a large impact, but also one of the reasons why we are not seeing the same sort of growth due to the Iraq War.

Pyronite | 04/09/08

Saying McCain likes war is like saying Obama likes taxes. It is something a simpleton would say.

twelve angry men | 04/09/08

Pyronite, didn't the U.S. spend roughly 90% of the federal budget on the military in 1945? All while food and other basic needs were rationed to a point that was worse than during the Depression? This would make any economy double! But it wouldn't be the reason for sustained growth or real growth for that matter! Look up capital accumulation. War destroys capital accumulation, plain and simple.

ShawnF | 04/09/08

Shawn, it is pretty much universally recognized that the second world war boosted the economy at an unheard of rate and ended the Great Depression. If you do have any facts and figures showing otherwise, specifically some numbers showing how "food and other basic needs were rationed to a point that was worse than during the Depression", please post a link to your sources.

RTBA2A | 04/11/08

http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1674.html http://www.genealogytoday.com/guide/war-ration-books.html http://www.ameshistoricalsociety.org/exhibits/events/rationing.htm http://www.alumnibhs.com/old%20geezer%20photos/gas_rationing_during_ww2.htm http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2007/01/did_world_war_i.html http://boards.historychannel.com/thread.jspa?threadID=300008392&messageID=300094423 http://www.antiwar.com/paul/paul63.html http://www.antiwar.com/henderson/?articleid=8727 30thinfantry.org/history_docs/rationing.doc http://www.foodtimeline.org/fooddecades.html#1930s If you need more RTBA2A just let me know. The common misconception is that WWII was the reason the Great Depression ended. WWII boosted the economy because most necessities were rationed in the U.S., the unemployed before the war was 7 million and there was over 11 million troops deployed hence the low unemployment, and the U.S. government put 90% of the federal budget towards the war. Like I said look up capital accumulation. If you need further education on these facts I suggest taking a macroeconomics and mircroeconomics course in college.

ShawnF | 04/12/08

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_home_front_during_World_War_II So the fact is food wasn't rationed during the Great Depression, unemployment was vastly declining towards WWII, and it is believed WWII actually slowed this trend. When the soldiers returned home they were offered the GI Bill, and soldiers went to school and the middle class was established, thus specialization of labor increased.

ShawnF | 04/12/08

And RTBA2A if it is universally know that WWII ended the depression, please tell me how and why and if it is the reason for sustained growth. Temporary growth can be established from a large influx in government spending and higher taxation, but it would not alter an economic trend in the future.

ShawnF | 04/12/08

its really sad the aff is losing this 2 to 10. ive lost my faith in humanity..

papabear | 04/12/08