The War Has Nothing To Do With The Economy, Stupid

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

MrsSpringsteen

Blue Crack Addict
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
29,276
Location
Edge's beanie closet
We just built too many houses

thinkprogress.org

Feb 18th

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIbdnM8Ts88

This morning on NBC’s Today Show, President Bush denied that the there’s any link between the faltering U.S. economy and $10 billion a month being spent on the Iraq war. In fact, according to Bush, the war is actually helping the economy:

The Iraq war has created jobs — for the administration’s defense contractor allies. Bush’s most recent budget is a windfall for contractors, and between 2000 and 2005, procurement was the “fastest growing component of federal discretionary spending.” (Halliburton has been the biggest beneficiary of the administration’s generosity.)

Five years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, however, national unemployment is going up. Between December 2006 and December 2007, the national unemployment rate increased by 13.6 percent in seasonally adjusted terms, from 4.4 to 5.0 percent. Additionally, 68 percent of the American public believes that redeployment from Iraq would help fix the country’s economic woes.

Transcript:

Some Americans believe that they feel they’re carrying the burden because of this economy.

G. BUSH: Yeah, well…

CURRY: They say we’re suffering because of this.

G. BUSH: … I don’t agree with that.

CURRY: You don’t agree with that? It has nothing do with the economy, the war — spending on the war?

G. BUSH: I don’t think so.

I think actually the spending in the war might help with jobs.

CURRY: Oh, yeah?

G. BUSH: Yeah, because we’re buying equipment, and people are working.

I think this economy is down because we built too many houses and the economy’s adjusting.
 
You know, it was always a widely held belief that war was good for the economy; it's one of the few positives that come out of war. And Bush has even managed to screw that up :(
 
MrsSpringsteen said:
We just built too many houses

thinkprogress.org

Feb 18th

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIbdnM8Ts88

This morning on NBC’s Today Show, President Bush denied that the there’s any link between the faltering U.S. economy and $10 billion a month being spent on the Iraq war. In fact, according to Bush, the war is actually helping the economy:

The Iraq war has created jobs — for the administration’s defense contractor allies. Bush’s most recent budget is a windfall for contractors, and between 2000 and 2005, procurement was the “fastest growing component of federal discretionary spending.” (Halliburton has been the biggest beneficiary of the administration’s generosity.)

Five years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, however, national unemployment is going up. Between December 2006 and December 2007, the national unemployment rate increased by 13.6 percent in seasonally adjusted terms, from 4.4 to 5.0 percent. Additionally, 68 percent of the American public believes that redeployment from Iraq would help fix the country’s economic woes.

Transcript:

Some Americans believe that they feel they’re carrying the burden because of this economy.

G. BUSH: Yeah, well…

CURRY: They say we’re suffering because of this.

G. BUSH: … I don’t agree with that.

CURRY: You don’t agree with that? It has nothing do with the economy, the war — spending on the war?

G. BUSH: I don’t think so.

I think actually the spending in the war might help with jobs.

CURRY: Oh, yeah?

G. BUSH: Yeah, because we’re buying equipment, and people are working.

I think this economy is down because we built too many houses and the economy’s adjusting.

He could add it is good for the crematories

flag draped coffin makers

it has reduced the labor force by a few thousand (just under four thousand?)

halliburton's stock is at an all time high
and they were successful in relocating over seas so there will be no corporate taxes from haliburton going into the treasury, and we all know when corporations pay taxes, it is bad for business
 
It's like he never even thought about it before she asked that question, honestly.
 
I can't wait to hear about how Resolution 1441 says the economy's doing fine.

Someone defend this man, please.
 
phillyfan26 said:


Someone defend this man, please.

Well even if the spending on the war has hurt the economy, at least the war has kept Saddam Hussein from bombing us with nuclear weapons.
 
Infinitum98 said:


Well even if the spending on the war has hurt the economy, at least the war has kept Saddam Hussein from bombing us with nuclear weapons.

I don't know if your being facetious or not but Saddam Hussein never had any nuclear weapons and couldn't even manage a competent program to aquire them.
 
Hmm gee, the war has been going on for 5 YEARS. Its just now effecting the economy?
As anyone who has ever taken an economic class knows, economies run in cycles. I believe the current downturn is an adjustment to the last 5 years of incredible growth the US economy has had, especially in homeownership. Things are cooling off. It also depends on where you live. Election years are especially bad due to the uncertainty of who will be president and what new economic and tax policies will be implemented.
 
The economy's been in trouble for a while. It's not just now. The war absolutely has played a role in the downturn of the economy.
 
For those that think war is often responsible for helping an economy here is a great article that debunks that theory. The part that shows how the Iraq war has affected the economy is on page 3 of the article. The article was written right before or as the war was beginning, but it makes some incredibly accurate predictions. I like how he projected some scenarios for how the war may have improved the economy if certain conditions were met. He said they were unlikely to happen, and not surprisingly, he was right.

http://economics.about.com/od/warandtheeconomy/a/warsandeconomy.htm
 
It is important to differentiate what has, or might, been caused by the war, and what has not been caused by the war.

The mortgage crisis, for example, has no direct cause in the war, and sooner or later would have come about, with or without the war.
If it is indirectly caused by the war I cannot say, but maybe there is some research or other information that could clarify.

The high oil price certainly has to do with the war, and especially with the speculation in the Futures market which is resoponsible for up to 30% of the oil price (at least that's the figure I know of) and this speculation is in part about how the war in Iraq will go on.

That the US just has built too many houses and is now adjusting is the most stupid thing I've heard of Bush saying in a long time, but I didn't expect him to change anything regarding the liberalised banking markets.
 
U2DMfan said:


I don't know if your being facetious or not but Saddam Hussein never had any nuclear weapons and couldn't even manage a competent program to aquire them.

Yea I know. I was being sarcastic. :wink:
 
Yes, the economy is a sinus curve, but that doesn't mean at all that there are no (avoidable) reasons that may increase the elongation of this curve or cause the downturn to impact earlier.

It's obviously too complex an issue for Bush, otherwise he would know that no one sector in the economy, and certainly not the industrial military complex with the help of wars, can keep a whole economy up.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom