LogFAQs > #925034914

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, Database 5 ( 01.01.2019-12.31.2019 ), DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Which is better for profit? War or Peace?
Zeus 07/22/19 3:28:10 PM #15:	Sahuagin posted... Zeus posted... Peace, obviously. War only benefits a small number of sectors while disrupting supply and interfering with the customer-base. Capitalism has been the most democratizing force in the world largely because it's more profitable to do business with other nations than to fight them. "war" doesn't mean "war with everyone". you can have all of your trade neighbours and still be at war with someone not worth being friends with. afaik, our modern economy goes back and forth between stagnating and being kickstarted by the next major conflict (or semi-manufactured threat) More trading partners means more opportunities for profit. Unless you're going into war to stifle a competitor, it's generally going to be more profitable to engage in trading than war. And, as a general rule, unless you're taking spoils from the war (ie, claiming land and valuables), war by itself can't generate a profit and industry gains tend to be offset by national debt. (Of course, back when taking spoils was an accepted practice, the government merely needed to sanction "adventurers" who form private militias to attack foreign nations and essentially claim land, valuables, etc, which they would keep but it'd become US soil. The concept is similar to the better-known privateer system.) streamofthesky posted... Zeus posted... Peace, obviously. War only benefits a small number of sectors while disrupting supply and interfering with the customer-base. Capitalism has been the most democratizing force in the world largely because it's more profitable to do business with other nations than to fight them. Capitalism and democracy are not the same thing, or even in the same category. One is an economic system and the other a form of governance. Russia and China have capitalist economies, the latter being rather successful at it, and are not democracies. And technically the US is a republic rather than a democracy. However, that doesn't change the fact that free markets improve the freedoms within a nation (as seen in BOTH Russia and China) and that capitalism has been a driving force in building democratic systems. Keep in mind that social media is largely credited with facilitating events like the Arab Spring. Conversely, the most repressive regimes in the world are the ones that don't engage in capitalism --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist. <cite>Zeus posted [p:925034914] in Which is b... [t:77880754]...</cite> <quote><cite>Sahuagin posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zeus posted...</cite> <quote>Peace, obviously. War only benefits a small number of sectors while disrupting supply and interfering with the customer-base. Capitalism has been the most democratizing force in the world largely because it's more profitable to do business with other nations than to fight them.</quote> "war" doesn't mean "war with everyone". you can have all of your trade neighbours and still be at war with someone not worth being friends with. afaik, our modern economy goes back and forth between stagnating and being kickstarted by the next major conflict (or semi-manufactured threat)</quote> More trading partners means more opportunities for profit. Unless you're going into war to stifle a competitor, it's generally going to be more profitable to engage in trading than war. And, as a general rule, unless you're taking spoils from the war (ie, claiming land and valuables), war by itself can't generate a profit and industry gains tend to be offset by national debt. (Of course, back when taking spoils was an accepted practice, the government merely needed to sanction "adventurers" who form private militias to attack foreign nations and essentially claim land, valuables, etc, which they would keep but it'd become US soil. The concept is similar to the better-known privateer system.) <cite>streamofthesky posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zeus posted...</cite> <quote>Peace, obviously. War only benefits a small number of sectors while disrupting supply and interfering with the customer-base. Capitalism has been the most democratizing force in the world largely because it's more profitable to do business with other nations than to fight them.</quote> Capitalism and democracy are not the same thing, or even in the same category. One is an economic system and the other a form of governance. Russia and China have capitalist economies, the latter being rather successful at it, and are not democracies.</quote> And technically the US is a republic rather than a democracy. However, that doesn't change the fact that free markets improve the freedoms within a nation (as seen in BOTH Russia and China) and that capitalism has been a driving force in building democratic systems. Keep in mind that social media is largely credited with facilitating events like the Arab Spring. Conversely, the most repressive regimes in the world are the ones that don't engage in capitalism --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1