Important Notice: Our web hosting provider recently started charging us for additional visits, which was unexpected. In response, we're seeking donations. Depending on the situation, we may explore different monetization options for our Community and Expert Contributors. It's crucial to provide more returns for their expertise and offer more Expert Validated Answers or AI Validated Answers. Learn more about our hosting issue here.

If Wars are good for the economy, why were Bushs Wars so bad for the economy?

0
Posted

If Wars are good for the economy, why were Bushs Wars so bad for the economy?

0

Production is good for the economy. War often causes a demand for production. The trick is to put people to work weather that means in a uniform or in a manufacturing plant. Production is a side effect of war but a country doesn’t always produce enough to cover the cost of war. War is also very expensive. Now our wars and our military are concentrating on high tech which means fewer people are actually needed to produce or to fight. High tech cost more. So we spent more than we made by employing people. Put it a different way. In World War 2 we employed 97% of our population. They were making ships, tanks, planes, building new factories, making roads and we had literally millions of troops in uniform and this in a time when our total population was under 135 million. We had massive production and that meant nearly all of our population was bringing home some kind of pay check. Money in the pocket becomes money spent in the economy which demands more jobs and more products. After World

Related Questions

What is your question?

*Sadly, we had to bring back ads too. Hopefully more targeted.

Experts123