From: Rakesh Bhandari (bhandari@BERKELEY.EDU)
Date: Wed Nov 03 2004 - 14:59:18 EST
sorry paul i couldn't read yr message carefully. will respond later > > >> >>In the US, UK, and France there was much less destruction of >>productive capital. In the US there has been no significant >>military damage since the Civil War. Since the US accounts for >>the greater part of world Military expenditure, the main effect >>of this has to be seen in terms of the boost to economic >>activity that it has produced in the USA for the last 60 years. >> >>What would the economic history of the US have been like if >>during that period military budgets had been at 1920's levels? > > ok i see a perm war econ thesis. war spending not always stimulating. part of the reason for 70s stagflation; not much of a stimulus now. less bang than under reagan today, moreover, military cuts were stimulative under Clinton. Japan grew with minimal military stimlus too. i would like to revisit pilling on perm war econ thesis in his critique of keynes, > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 04 2004 - 00:00:01 EST