Sunday, August 19, 2007
Economic aspect of war
In ordinary times it's hard to decrease population drastically. People cannot kill other people in legal manners. Population tend to increase. The more population grows the harder they feed themselves. War occurs when systematic culling was necessary. At war innocent people kill one another. There's no more effective way of culling of population other than war.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Why don't you go in for social engineering? Why do "conservatives" favor war as a way to cull other people rather than birth control?
ReplyDeleteThere has been widening constantly the separation between nominal value and substantial value of stock price since 1997, or all savings and substantial gross domestic products. I mean nominal value has been expanding. I'm simply stating that war had been used as the best way to eliminate this gap instantly.
ReplyDeleteBiological warfare would be much more effective, perhaps also cheaper. Could someone please invent a little germ that causes infertility or impotency? No, not the latter - the enemy would surrender before the effect was sufficient.
ReplyDeleteThe Iraq war "eliminated a gap between nominal and substantial value of stock"? Never heard of such a problem or of it's being instantly solved. And I thought you were talking about the benefits of mass killing for population control.
ReplyDeleteActually, I assume that war used to take place when a population outgrew its territory - you're right so far. When you can't grow enough food in your own fields, you want your neighbour's fields.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand one word of that "nominal value" stuff!
This is a very basic economic argument according to my theory. Black Monday took place in 1987. Gulf war followed in 1990. Great depression started in 1929, then Nazis took power in 1933. Prior to any war, we are sure to have a kind of economic recession, in other words economic crush is the omen of war in advance.Nominal value is money or savings, or 'flow' in economic term, if nominal value is much higher than substantial value, or 'stock' in economic term, a stock here means supply of goods or materials available for sale or use, again if nominal value exceeds substantial value, it is very dangerous. Because war is the easiest way to eliminate this gap. In war always winners acquires some substantial value( land, raw material, resources, etc) to add up to their previous substantial value, which resulting in making their nominal value and substantial value equalise. I think you heard about the news of sub-prime non performing loan. This loan was sold all over the world through security companies in each country, so it is impossible to make up for each loss those non performing loans made. This has been causing the downward of the price of shares in stock market.
ReplyDeleteStrikingly correct, that's what I mean.As to nominal value, let me explain.Nominal value is in short, money. Money means merely a relative value to substantial value, or resources, land, goods, etc., basically nominal value means almost nothing as opposed to substantial value. There's no meaning of possession of money itself, if they can buy something valuable, then money has value for the first time. What are you going to do if you have enough money but you don't have enough resources and you can't buy them in ordinary commercial measures. Those who have enough money took them at war. If money( nominal value, flow, price of company shares ) and resources (substantial value, raw material, end products, stock-not company shares- in general, ) strike a balance, war never occurs. But this gap has been increasing for these ten years.
ReplyDeleteIn fact some epidemic played an important role on population control in the past. But it is no doubt two major wars in 20th century had much to do with the skyrocketing population explosion.We males repeats potency and impotency regularly, and this is just a matter of a few minutes. We always surrender by the charm of our wives.
ReplyDeleteDo you mean like if there's a famine or drought and I have heaps of money, I use it to build a ship and become a pirate? I use my nominal valuables to steal other people's substantial values when my own substantial values are sort of passive?
ReplyDeleteSorry - I don't understand economy. No idea whether your theory is correct.
I think the world wars caused progress in medical science, hence the population explosion. Is that what you are saying?
ReplyDeleteJust seems to me there's better ways to manage population growth and economic imbalances than by slaughtering everybody in sight, which is pretty well what happens when you unleash the army and air force.
ReplyDeleteI think I was rather sarcastic. Obviously this idea is dangerous. We all need to make an every possible effort to evade such a very stupid half-baked idea.
ReplyDelete