Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Why is obama continuing Bush's Iraq war debacle? I voted for him to end that war. He lied. [View all]Octafish
(55,745 posts)92. ''Money trumps peace.'' -- pretzeldent George W Bush, Feb. 14, 2007
Uttered at a press conference in which not a single of the callow, cowed press corpse saw fit to ask a follow-up. And then he laughs.
Gold Star mom Cindy Sheehan tried to bring it to our nation's attention. Few others, if anyone, saw fit to comment.
Economist Tyler Cowen of George Mason University has seen the future and it looks bleak for most of us. Thankfully, the United States of America may be in for good times, especially for those perched atop the socio-economic pyramid scheme, should war break out.
The Pitfalls of Peace
The Lack of Major Wars May Be Hurting Economic Growth
Tyler Cowen
The New York Times, JUNE 13, 2014
The continuing slowness of economic growth in high-income economies has prompted soul-searching among economists. They have looked to weak demand, rising inequality, Chinese competition, over-regulation, inadequate infrastructure and an exhaustion of new technological ideas as possible culprits.
An additional explanation of slow growth is now receiving attention, however. It is the persistence and expectation of peace.
The world just hasnt had that much warfare lately, at least not by historical standards. Some of the recent headlines about Iraq or South Sudan make our world sound like a very bloody place, but todays casualties pale in light of the tens of millions of people killed in the two world wars in the first half of the 20th century. Even the Vietnam War had many more deaths than any recent war involving an affluent country.
Counterintuitive though it may sound, the greater peacefulness of the world may make the attainment of higher rates of economic growth less urgent and thus less likely. This view does not claim that fighting wars improves economies, as of course the actual conflict brings death and destruction. The claim is also distinct from the Keynesian argument that preparing for war lifts government spending and puts people to work. Rather, the very possibility of war focuses the attention of governments on getting some basic decisions right whether investing in science or simply liberalizing the economy. Such focus ends up improving a nations longer-run prospects.
It may seem repugnant to find a positive side to war in this regard, but a look at American history suggests we cannot dismiss the idea so easily. Fundamental innovations such as nuclear power, the computer and the modern aircraft were all pushed along by an American government eager to defeat the Axis powers or, later, to win the Cold War. The Internet was initially designed to help this country withstand a nuclear exchange, and Silicon Valley had its origins with military contracting, not todays entrepreneurial social media start-ups. The Soviet launch of the Sputnik satellite spurred American interest in science and technology, to the benefit of later economic growth.
War brings an urgency that governments otherwise fail to summon. For instance, the Manhattan Project took six years to produce a working atomic bomb, starting from virtually nothing, and at its peak consumed 0.4 percent of American economic output. It is hard to imagine a comparably speedy and decisive achievement these days.
SNIP...
Living in a largely peaceful world with 2 percent G.D.P. growth has some big advantages that you dont get with 4 percent growth and many more war deaths. Economic stasis may not feel very impressive, but its something our ancestors never quite managed to pull off. The real questions are whether we can do any better, and whether the recent prevalence of peace is a mere temporary bubble just waiting to be burst.
Tyler Cowen is a professor of economics at George Mason University.
SOURCE: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/14/upshot/the-lack-of-major-wars-may-be-hurting-economic-growth.html?_r=0
[font color="purple"]Dr. Cowen, from what I've read, is a fine person and not one to promulgate war. He's just sayin'.
He has commented on other Big Ticket economic themes impacting us today: "Inequality," for another instance. [/font color]
Tired Of Inequality? One Economist Says It'll Only Get Worse
by NPR STAFF
September 12, 2013 3:05 AM
Economist Tyler Cowen has some advice for what to do about America's income inequality: Get used to it. In his latest book, Average Is Over, Cowen lays out his prediction for where the U.S. economy is heading, like it or not:
"I think we'll see a thinning out of the middle class," he tells NPR's Steve Inskeep. "We'll see a lot of individuals rising up to much greater wealth. And we'll also see more individuals clustering in a kind of lower-middle class existence."
It's a radical change from the America of 40 or 50 years ago. Cowen believes the wealthy will become more numerous, and even more powerful. The elderly will hold on to their benefits ... the young, not so much. Millions of people who might have expected a middle class existence may have to aspire to something else.
SNIP...
Some people, he predicts, may just have to find a new definition of happiness that costs less money. Cowen says this widening is the result of a shifting economy. Computers will play a larger role and people who can work with computers can make a lot. He also predicts that everyone will be ruthlessly graded every slice of their lives, monitored, tracked and recorded.
CONTINUED with link to the audio...
http://www.npr.org/2013/09/12/221425582/tired-of-inequality-one-economist-says-itll-only-get-worse
For some reason, the interview with Steve Inskeep didn't bring up the subject of the GOVERNMENT DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT LIKE IN THE NEW DEAL so I thought I'd bring it up. Older DUers may recall the Democratic Party once actually did do stuff for the average American, from school and work to housing and justice. But, we can't afford that now, obviously, thanks to austerity or the sequester or the divided government, but certainly not the trillions spent on wars for profit.
As for where American's entrepreneurial spirit of war came from: Poppy: Bush Sr told the FBI he was in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
112 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Why is obama continuing Bush's Iraq war debacle? I voted for him to end that war. He lied. [View all]
grahamhgreen
Jun 2015
OP
People here said upon entry into Iraq that it would destabilize the region for decades.
NCTraveler
Jun 2015
#6
From what I've read, ISIS is a coalition of the Baathists and Islamic radicals. They are not
grahamhgreen
Jun 2015
#15
I've read that ISIS is a combination of Extemists and Baathists. What I see, if we leave, is that
grahamhgreen
Jun 2015
#25
So if you understand all of this, why are you blaming and condemning Obama?
Liberal_Stalwart71
Jun 2015
#32
There's no way we were going to watch all of Iraq fall to ISIS without at least trying to
TwilightGardener
Jun 2015
#18
I honestly don't think that's it (this time). We actually have plenty of oil now, anyway.
TwilightGardener
Jun 2015
#23
It's not really falling to ISIS, this group is the old Iraq military mixed with Sunni extremists, so
grahamhgreen
Jun 2015
#27
It's the same in that we are still fighting the Baathists, who have been rebranded by the media as
grahamhgreen
Jun 2015
#26
Obama's had us back in Iraq, with operations in Syria for a year, yet here we are escalating.
morningfog
Jun 2015
#80
It was necessary for candidate Obama to distance himself from the hawkist Clinton.
rhett o rick
Jun 2015
#35
Same reason we have Heritage Care, fracking, offshore drilling, charter schools, attacks on teachers
Doctor_J
Jun 2015
#49
Because he is free from having to run again and can let his let shine. nt
raouldukelives
Jun 2015
#50
Its OPs like this that make the left appear rather stupid on narional security issues.
JoePhilly
Jun 2015
#63
And they think as a candidate, he said he'd pull troops out of Afganistan, when ...
JoePhilly
Jun 2015
#109
"But here on DU ... any use of the military is equal to a full scale invasion."
BainsBane
Jun 2015
#111
Psst! Don't tell anyone! It'll stifle the outrage, DU's primary fuel source. n/t
freshwest
Jun 2015
#74
I loathe wars for profit. If the goal is to "degrade and destroy ISIL", as the president has said;
grahamhgreen
Jun 2015
#96
The cart was run into the ditch by Bush, and Bush was unable to secure the agreement needed
Thinkingabout
Jun 2015
#101