It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Anyone Else Think We're Building a War to Stop a Depression?

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by mordant1
 


When ideals meet reality it is always such an unhappy introduction.




posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 03:27 PM
link   
Waaaay too many components for there to be a Direct line to: War economy pulls-up the commercial/capitalistc/Corporation-as-boss economy

tooo many variables... this big-brother/elite[bilderbergers] is waaaay out of hand with the 'conspiracy theory' community... they (we) are building
erroneous scenarios---just because they are possible!---not because these paths towards war are necessarily based on a type of 'occams razor' approach.

yeah--- both i & you have free-floating ideas, swirling around as much as realistically possible--- but all this speculation is just that....
mind games!

Oh, yeah... its' good to examine the potentialities---but lets cateorgize them as such...and footnote such as such



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 03:52 PM
link   
You seriously believe that nonsense they taught us in school? It's not so hard to figure it out. Let's see, we're in a depression, we have no money, so we go to war...? With what money? Where is that money gonna come from? I thought the point was that we had no money!? Oh I know! We'll just take out a hefty loan from our trusty Federal Reserve.


Thanks but no thanks. You can have your stupid war, you can take out your stupid loan but I won't be taking part and I won't be paying it back. The sheeple will always follow, there's nothing we can do about that. The best we can hope for is that all the sheeple wipe each other out so us awaken ones can finally have a chance to take out country and world back.

Oh, and please, if you could PLEASE explain to me how a freckin war could end a depression, I'd really love to hear it. For some strange reason, having absolutely no money and then taking on one of the most expensive ventures you can take that doesn't create anything but only destroys just doesn't sound like a good investment.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by conspiracy88
 


Look, you have to realize that our concept of money is nothing but a figment of imagination. There is nothing to back up the paycheck you receive. Number on a computer screen are all that stands between you and going back to fur trading.

With that being said - amazing things happen in a global conflict, especially in this digital age where entire databases can be wiped out via "cyber attack"....


Look, I think it naive to assume that we actually need any physical resources in the coffers to go to war.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 09:04 PM
link   
The nation of cowards moves forward.

If this doesn't show the reduction of the policy of political correctness to absurdity, then we are not only a nation of cowards but a nation of retards too.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:10 AM
link   
reply to post by gncnew
 


Well I see the position of philospher-king has been filled, nice gig, man, good catch.
That leaves us adults to actually formulate a real world course of action, take responsibility that you assign to us and make final preparations.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:16 AM
link   
it certainly has felt like history has been repeating. anyone notice fashion lately? what's in is 1940s military styled clothing. go check out the latest threads. pbs is running the War again, about WW2... everyone thinks the president is a communist (FDR), the global economy is in the crapper.. i'd say WW3 is imminent.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by gncnew
reply to post by conspiracy88
 

Look, I think it naive to assume that we actually need any physical resources in the coffers to go to war.

You need physical resources to go to war. Unless it's all punching and kicking.

You're right; money does not equal wealth. But that does not mean that wealth does not exist or that it is not an important concept.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by NewlyAwakened
 


Change your responses or change your handle.
There should be a posting of ones age.
Wars are made to allow countries to accumulate DEBT to be paid for by TAXATION in perpetuity. What pays for the 'stuff' is inflated money created without underlying value, and when you inflate the value the purchasing power for the peeps drops.
See jane, see jane run.
Run spot run.
At least that should be familiar



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by NewlyAwakened

Originally posted by gncnew
reply to post by conspiracy88
 

Look, I think it naive to assume that we actually need any physical resources in the coffers to go to war.

You need physical resources to go to war. Unless it's all punching and kicking.

You're right; money does not equal wealth. But that does not mean that wealth does not exist or that it is not an important concept.


Very true, my point was not well made. All I meant was the concept of the country having enough "money" is just such a subjective concept that it would never be a hindrance.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by mordant1
 


Not sure where you're getting prickled at with what I said. I was simply responding to this:




The best system is one where you are left alone to provide for yourself and your family or find mutual aide based on respect and mutual voluntary assistance.


This is the best system.... a completely unrealistic and impossible system based on human nature, human history, and even based upon the little spat we just had.

Therefore I will repeat that when ideals meet reality - it sucks.

I for one am tired of hearing people pontificate of the "greatness" of completely impossible scenarios.

It's be great of magic fruit grew out of the ground and everyone could eat it and never get tired of the taste and it needed no water, sun, or even good soil... boy, that sure would solve world hunger....

BUT THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE... so why discuss it as "the best system" we should somehow be mystically working towards?



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by gncnew
 


curious interpretation because while perfection was never an option or expectation on an individual level, the US started with just such an unrealistic framework, and as history shows no other framework was been as successful when tried.
No it doesnt result in universal wonderfulness for all, but attempts to implement and manage claimed eventual wonderfulness have worked even more poorly and generated bad results even faster.
Perhaps my philosophic flaw is that I try to get to a basic concept that works by interpretation the same for everyone and requires the least amount of interference while maximizing everyness responsibility for themselves. I'm gonna guess that this was the concept that the founders wrote about and tried to maintain. Some think that there are those that can fairly collect and distribute largess at every level. I just know better than that.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by mordant1
reply to post by gncnew
 


curious interpretation because while perfection was never an option or expectation on an individual level, the US started with just such an unrealistic framework, and as history shows no other framework was been as successful when tried.
No it doesnt result in universal wonderfulness for all, but attempts to implement and manage claimed eventual wonderfulness have worked even more poorly and generated bad results even faster.
Perhaps my philosophic flaw is that I try to get to a basic concept that works by interpretation the same for everyone and requires the least amount of interference while maximizing everyness responsibility for themselves. I'm gonna guess that this was the concept that the founders wrote about and tried to maintain. Some think that there are those that can fairly collect and distribute largess at every level. I just know better than that.


Hmmm, I see your point, but I guess I think that the simpleness of that concept fails to apply well to today's country.

I say this because the nation we were then simply didn't need as much governing. Think of a typical small business. First you start with a couple of guys in a garage making some cutting edge technology.

Next they make a product and start selling it - thus they hire a "sales guy" and and "accountant" to manage that side of things so they can get back to what they're good at.

Now it's a huge product and everyone wants it. In fact there is now competition because the idea is so good that other companies are trying it out - so they hire a marketing and advertising team. Now they've got 10 employees, time to get an HR person.

Suddenly they've exceeded the garage and local storage capacity, so they buy a production facility and an office. - so now they need a business manager to track the production of the product and a financial manager to track the money. They also outsource the janitorial services of their building

Oops, they've gone global. Now you have regional account managers, product mangers, R&D analysts, and you have to have executive management to operate all these individual pieces in a cohesive machine that can effectively complete their mission.

I'm talking about Microsoft.

It started very simple, but growth required growth. Microsoft is littered with bureaucracy because it is simply too large to be "simply" managed.

The United States deals on things so much larger than even existed in 1776. Therefore our fore father's concept of government was over simplified because it was designed to fit a very simplistic national model.

Today, just managing the Interstate system would overwhelm the government that was envisioned in 1776.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by gncnew
 


How do you know about microsoft? I assumed you were using the much superior soviet products and operating systems
I rest my case.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by mordant1
reply to post by NewlyAwakened
 


Change your responses or change your handle.
There should be a posting of ones age.
Wars are made to allow countries to accumulate DEBT to be paid for by TAXATION in perpetuity. What pays for the 'stuff' is inflated money created without underlying value, and when you inflate the value the purchasing power for the peeps drops.
See jane, see jane run.
Run spot run.
At least that should be familiar

Manners & Decorum anyone?

In any case, you should study economics sometime. Or just get in touch with your common sense and realize that in order for anything to be produced, it must be produced. Yeah, it's a tautology, but I felt its expression was warranted here. All the monetary gymnastics are just a smokescreen for the elites to control more wealth than they ever rightfully earned. There's nothing to it at bottom. Peruse mises.org; you might learn something.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by NewlyAwakened
 


ME? how does war get one out of a depression, Answer me that. Please do. THere's not an example where a modern country ends a war and avoids a depression by paying its loans off and everyones happy. The basic mechanism of the US ending world war 2 was ignoring the debt and cashflow economics. THAT my friend is not the same thing as curing a depression, it is called DELAYING a depression, which coincidentally is happening now and to you. The postwar cashflow economy is now officially OVER and any of the HONEST economists, not beholding to the govt will tell you so.
After ww2 a house cost 3 thousand dollars the same one cost 100k now. Do you see anything that looks like a cure there?
Digesting liberal comm college interpretation is what got us into this mess, right here, right now, so reconsider freshman econ fables, look at the debt curves and learn to taste and interpret, not not just swallow.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by mordant1
 

Um, wait, why did you disagree with me in the first place? We are on the same page. See my first post in this thread.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 03:01 PM
link   
OP, RAND corporation certainly agrees with you.

RAND Lobbies Pentagon: Start War To Save U.S. Economy


According to reports out of top Chinese mainstream news outlets, the RAND Corporation recently presented a shocking proposal to the Pentagon in which it lobbied for a war to be started with a major foreign power in an attempt to stimulate the American economy and prevent a recession.

A fierce debate has now ensued in China about who that foreign power may be, with China itself as well as Russia and even Japan suspected to be the targets of aggression.

It would have to be a big war.

Either China or Russia or Iran/North Korea/Lebanon/Syria at the same time.

Those people are insane and they have lots of lobbyists. RAND corporation is really powerful in the US.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by mordant1
reply to post by gncnew
 


How do you know about microsoft? I assumed you were using the much superior soviet products and operating systems
I rest my case.


??? Hommie, I promise you that there are two facts you've missed here completely:


  1. In Soviet Russia, Conspiracy Find YOU!
  2. I'm so opposite from the comrade model.

I'm not suggesting the topic of this thread is a good idea... just noting the potential for what is happening.

Now, your suggestion that the logic behind it is founded good solid "Worker's Paradise" reasoning is perfectly sound as the current administration would very much like us to adopt a new moniker of "U.S.S.A".... but that's another thread and discussion all together.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 03:04 PM
link   
I think that may be backwards. In my view, the ruling class have engineered this depression/collapse in order to force people into fighting a world war, depopulate, control the people, and limit our use of various resources over the coming decades.

War doesn't get everyone out of a depression. During WW2, the whole world economy was depressed, and after the war, most countries still seem to have continued their slump, except for the U.S. and Russia. It's how we established our superpower status, because not only had we been victorious, but we also didn't screw up our infrastructure by fighting on our land. Yes, Pearl Harbor was a tragedy, but it also was a small incident on the grand scale of the collective destruction that was WW2.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join