Quote:
Originally Posted by Luce
How much was lost inside the USA?
|
Much less than in Europe and Japan. But still lots of work in America produced nothing that advanced society. That is the problem with war. Nothing useful is created. Plenty of destruction (massive negative growth) exists especially on the front lines (ie Europe and Japan).
GE has had no significant growth for most of the past 30 years. So the spread sheets are finally reporting it. US had a tremendous loss of growth during and due to Vietnam. Again, spread sheets only reported that many years later. The point is that economics can be easily subverted. Many assume economic activity is automatically growth. Provided are examples of economic activity resulting in no growth or even negative growth.
Trump got rich by simply doing nothing productive. By simply dumping losses (quite successfully) on others. Those four Atlantic City casinos are a perfect example. Growth means something tangible results. Those casinos are examples of no growth.
Productive work done today really only appears as profits four or ten years later. Fundamental research today (that creates growth) is reported by profits maybe 20 years later.
RCA created a blue light LED in the 1960s But could not make it work sufficiently to become marketable. Hiroshi Amano created the first successful blue light LED (that makes white LEDs possible) in 1989. When did an LED bulb become a new standard? After 2010? It takes that long for fundamental research (what makes growth) to result in profits. Another example of how spread sheets really only report what happened many years or decades later.
Economic activity (ie larger cash flows) is not always growth. Plenty of work done in America during WWII and Vietnam. Which resulted in no (or negative) growth.
1950s saw lots of work because negative growth during the war had to be created by positive growth. Ie a massive housing boom.