Since the financial crisis of 2007-08, our economy has experienced a promising, be it slow, recovery. Thanks to the bold and decisive action of our fiscal and monetary officials, our stock market has risen to over $2000 following one of the worst crashes in history. Eight years after the crash, and our economy continues to show green shoots; and although this is positive, many economists are worried that we have insufficient demand to drive a full recovery and bring about another economic boom. In order to kick the economy into high gear, economists agree that we are going to need a strong catalyst.
It is has long been argued by top economists that World War II was what finally ended the great depression. After a decade of indecisive and overly cautious monetary and fiscal policy following the onset of the great depression, the US economy remained stagnant and poverty stricken. People were destitute and work opportunities were hard to come by. An aura of helplessness and resentment had swept the nation. But with the advent of the war, the country finally found it had something to unify behind, and arguably this collective excitement did much to reinvigorate the American work ethic and can-do spirit. With the increase in military spending, jobs were finally coming back, and entire industries began to develop. Many such industries, such as aerospace, still employ thousands of Americans to this day. These war-related job opportunities gave Americans valuable skills that spilled over into other industries and allowed them to start their own businesses. After a decade of apathy, Americans were finally back to work, and a new age of prosperity was born.
Putting aside for a moment the ghastly connotations of war, one has to admit that the economic benefits of World War II have been profound, and have undoubtedly contributed to the prosperity that many of us enjoy today. Many economists argue that the benefits of a moral and just war far outweigh the short term costs. It is for this reason that many economists recommend a World War III as a catalyst to finally kick-start our economy and usher in a new age of growth and innovation. A World War III would likely drive investment in AI technology and cyber security, and help to revive our manufacturing industry that has largely been outsourced to Asia. At the same time, it may help resolve conflicts with our enemies and help quell the threat of nuclear proliferation.
In summary, economies don’t just grow on their own; economic growth needs to be forced. Once the economy is in motion, it gains momentum and can continue to grow with less intervention. But when growth is too slow, force must be applied in order to avoid falling back into a recession. Our economic officials have done a fantastic job of saving our economy after the crash of 2007-08, and putting us back on the road to recovery. But in order to accelerate this growth into something more meaningful, we are going to need an event of magnificent proportions. I therefore ask that you put your prejudices aside, and consider for a moment the very real benefits of a war with our enemies; for it is only by following the advice of our economic experts that we can once again begin a new age of prosperity.
View Comments (41)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1 2 Next »Who should die for World War 3? The author of the article and his family members? Well, okay.
The true force of prosperity has nothing to do with the economy. It has to do with technological advancements. And technological advancements are the ultimate force of deflation. Deflation is represented by technology. Inflation is represented by economy. Both cannot work harmoniously together. If they do, then technology is not serving your welfare enough. Without the central banks and their control of the economy, we probably would be 500 years far more advanced than today. Many advanced technologies are being held in secret not for public interest.
Right on. You sir deserve the million dollar bonus and I'm not talking about the douche with the handle above. Is that clear enough for the women in this audience ?
World War III will drive technological innovations like never before. We could become the leaders in robotic warfare and cyber warfare. These industries can easily transition into peacetime and provide the bedrock for future economic growth.
I believe you, your family, and everyone you care about should be on the front lines in this war and should be the first to die in it - would you support that? The second I see you as the first enlisted, I will applaud you for not being a hypocrite.
Do you notice that most of the significant technological innovations we have were done outside of warring periods?
Can you give me evidence of technological innovations done during world wars compare to those done out of world wars? And compare between the two which one is more prevalent?
It is a pity that the human intellect has evolved to such a state that it favors technologies related to warfare far more than related to any other things.
In the end, who should die for World War 3? Just assuming World War 3 will certainly drive technological breakthroughs guaranteed, will you then be willing to die in a war for it? Or will you ask others to die for it for your interest?
WWW III will also help the various cultures of the World to integrate better together. A few low-class cultures can be easily eliminated during WWW III, and other cultures can be swallowed up by the advanced cultures for a more thorough cultural integration.
Yes, that's true. After World War II we got the European Union - proving that war ultimately leads to better cohesion between countries. After the next war, we might be able to set up something even bigger, maybe on a global level!
That would be great news. But then we would need a Global War in order to set up something much bigger like maybe a World Government (NWO), which then would need a Super World War, to set something even bigger, like maybe Super World Government, which then would need an even bigger World War, like Hyper World War, until we reach a state of total control where the ruling elite will say "Oh, we have finally reached a point where no war is necessary to continue moving forward." in which case all of us the non-ruling elites would be hoodwinked and fooled by the ruling elites from the very start of the process.
Is this a joke site?
The economy does not need a World War III.
It's much easier to ramp all our current interventions up to the necessary levels. This will be the fastest way to boost spending in the economy.
There is one type of sub-human species that thirst for world wars - the Jesuits and the bankers that manage their finances (ref. Rothschilds).
It is already long well known that these people thirst for world wars for more control.
To say that we need wars to progress forward is like meeting a person who says a wound must be beaten and cut up further more for it to heal. This is a very extreme and distorted mentality.
I think it would be better if hillary gets in power, shed get a nobel prize for peace for sure (like oboma ) she could bomb the sh!! of of russia, china etc and she wouldn't have to worry about the likes of cindy sheenan or neil young bothering her like sir donald would.
I forgot bruce springsteen and the dixychicks. If you ever want to hear from them again hillary needs to be presedent
MDB... I stumbled into your site to see your reasonings behind advocacy for more war. I'm disheartened that you actually believe this in any way, shape or form would yield a positive outcome for the billions of human beings inhabiting this planet.
If you'd like me to outline what specifically causes me to be disheartened, and explain why... I think I'd literally have to stop at nearly every single line of the above blog post you've written.
- a fellow human being
They say, in the spiritual world, if a mind is oriented towards destruction/distortion then the self-mind entity will progress towards such world of destruction/distortion, never mind if such entity wish the same for others. Similarly, if a mind is oriented towards peace/harmony then the self-mind entity will progress towards such world of peace/harmony, never mind if such entity wish the same for others.
To those favoring wars for progress, there will be no progress for them.
Anyone can give 1001 benefits (real or artificial) of a WW3.
But nobody will be able to give 1 answer to "Who should die in a WW3?"
Repent, ye sinners and devil-worshippers, for you have been greatly deceived.
I am up for ww3 in which communists/socialists/centralists/parasitic beaurocrats/propagandists like this author , most of the comments & readers of this website are drafted into the army while we private property owners sit & profit from your deaths.
Most of this sites users are women & minority imbeciles who get cash & entitlements not for any work done but just for being a pro government imbecile? That explains why all comments are so pro war , as women are exempt from draft & would rather profit from other men's deaths.
Given the incredible stupidity of the author and most of the commenters, World War Three can't come fast enough.
To me, our deeply tragic sItuation is the product of our bad economic choices. As a responsible and accountable country, we have to endure it and bravely pay the price of our mistakes. There is no way we promote a 3rd world war in order to get out of it. It would certainly not be on par with our true Greatness.
America has never known any war against real foreigners on its ground. Maybe that's why we talk too easily of its possibility? We still do not fully unerstand what it really means to be at war.
I don't know what (pseudo) top economists who didn't see the numerous implications of the financiarisation of our economy and who didn't see the subprime crisis did say on the matter (!), but I know for sure what a "simple mind" called Einstein said: "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones".
Our country would be utterly destroyed. There might be no american nor human being alive after nuclear winter. In fact, we do not have a single chance of winning it (because of the civil war it would give birth to).
If you're looking after the destruction of the USA and of our great democraty, starting a 3rd world war is by far the best way to achieve just that.
Best regards.