Comments by "Quizmaster China" (@QuizmasterLaw) on "1946: The Greatest Depression in US History (prior to 2020)" video.

TIK when all your production is literally going to bombs and explosives to kill other people; that's the opposite of productivity. It's really not possible to do any accurate economic measurement from 1939-1949. This isn't against you it's just the fact that a war-time economy achieves full employment by killing of the unemployed and burns off excess production in a giant potlatch of mass murder. This is just the material fact. You can't consider the war-time economy with literal rationining and lots of people who are young and working age killed as other than utterly dysfunctional. 1946-1950 was a "boom" in the sense that the worst was over and production could (and did by 1950) resume.
48
if you kill of the unemployed and blow up excess production then the survivors get to split up the land and unburnt building and become richer! See? WW2 ended the depression! Imagine all that 2m by 2m cubic real estate which was sold as a result!
36
if you are too stupid to make your own weapons you really shouldn't have them...
5
@TheImperatorKnight Hoover was the opposite of a socialist: he was a non-interventionist. His response to the depression was -- do nothing, this is normal, improvident people are having their asses handed to them, and that's good. His motto was "prosperity is just around the corner". Reagan was similar only his motto was "stay the course". But Reagan was a borrow-and-spend interventionist in practice. Borrow money to build weapons to defeat the USSR, which he did. Go Reagan!
4
NorCal OntheRight is preaching the typical jew-bankers conspiracy theory. there's a grain of truth to it but only a grain, and it's a grain surrounded in a bunch of lies.
4
@TheImperatorKnight ... can we tell them about the top secret PANZERBANK yet?!?
3
the great depression wasn't caused by printing money: back then the USA was on the gold standard. all dollar transactions could be cleared in gold, that was in fact the only way to do international business. the great depression was however caused by a credit bubble. Germany owed reparations to France and a lot of other countries. France owed money to Britain and the USA. Britain also owed $ to the USA. So long as product could be extracted from Germany that human centipede of deadly credit can keep going: Germany pays France, France pays USA and UK. UK pays USA. Once Germany defaulted and refused to repay any furthe reparations the only option was for the USA to extend credit -- which it did. But eventually the creditors want repayment. When the credited can't pay then the bank collapses, and since the bank has no money to lend businesses relying on credit to fund current operations go belly up. It was a crisis of paper money: but the paper money was bonds, not dollars.
2
@aranos6269 not really; they know in fact that generally speaking they are better off fostering productive labor rather than getting workers to kill each other off. where is GW Bush or Tony Blair now hm? Or for more extreme examples how did Lenin Stalin Mussolini and Hitler finish? Lenin was killed by Stalin was killed by Beria was killed by Khruschev: it's like a human centipede. If you think you will prosper by mass murder, well, you're a "useful idiot". (Google that for fun!)
2
@ekevanderzee9538 Inflationary stimulus only lasts around 6 months. Wars generally are longer than that. War time "stimulus" is generally the result of everyone unemployed being put in a uniform. It's completely illusory. Not even China thinks waging war is a good business proposition. The only predatory state on earth left is North Korea, maybe also Russia. These are clearly not the future and the PRC sees that.
2
WW2 was not waged with a view to getting the economy going. Some people DID however think the Vietnam war would be great for the economy, which it obviously wasn't, for obvious reasons.
2
btw we are about to have another global great depression. expect wars.
2
@matrin2 I never said the war production was entirely wasted, entirely useless. However, just google 1945 boneyard to see what happened to most all of the war-time aircraft. You see, Stalin wanted the USA to disarm as much as possible and as quickly as possible, and so he had all his friends in the CPUSA do all in their power to make sure U.S. weapons were demilitarized. Peace X_Xut
2
@thumper8684 wait till 30% global unemployment catches up to the stock market. You understand just about no one was working in China from January through March, right? Guess what? That's going to be the entire planet in 3 months time.
2
SOMEONE BUILD TIK A GIANT STEAL PIGGY BANK WITH TREADS AND FLY PAPER ARMOR
2
#millennialremover
1
Why? Desperation, stupidity, opportunism. Desperate people do desperate things. The strong ones may take advantage of the weak. To burn off excess production and employ the unemployed. Shit makes it tough Not to be a Marxist but Marx is catastrophically wrong on "the dictatorship of the proletariat", "red terror", and the principle contradiction isn't class, it's nation (that's a Maoist error which grew out of Marx's long dead rotting brain). Marx believed in inevitable boom-bust-war/revolution. He was kinda wrong about that. But yeah, i know how to reduce unemployment PERMANENTLY.
1
@BitterComments Between whom? China and any of her neighbors, all of whom are aggrieved by Chinese land-grabs. Between Israel and any of her neighbors. Between Iran and the USA. Between the USA and North Korea. No shortage of powder kegs for regional wars.
1
@TheImperatorKnight that's interesting and I shall research but I know his initial response was do nothing and reamined so for some time. I'm probably closer to the mainstream narrative than you; so you have the burden of proof, but unlike timeghosthistory I expect you will carry it you are a determined researcher who actually cites all his sources.
1
Read "Unrestricted Warfare".
1
^wishful thinking. economic collapse is positively correlated to increased wars. have a look at the Iran Iraq war to see how recessions and disease worked hand in glove; or the American civil war. Rampant diseases did NOT stop either of those wars.
1
@_Abjuranax_ Sure, but I know of no instances of wars started or prevented by diseases, just that diseases are used as weapons of war hint hint #wuhaninstituteofvirology
1
@Undead38055 i love you all, and wish had been wrong.
1
@Undead38055 No one ever "wins" in war. My side will be undefeated.
1
TIK. You need to stick to tanks
1
@Edax_Royeaux yeah, Some of the war production could be repurposed Some of the production lines could be easily retooled Some served as the basis for new post war innovations (notably plastics!) but much of the war time production could find no civilian applications nor be easily retooled. This is why we don't have flying boats or amphibious trucks or submarine freighters for cool examples of shit which can be done but is very expensive and unprofitable but might win a world war or two.
1
@Edax_Royeaux yes; but how many submarine freighting companies or even freight submarines exist today? Zero. Because outside of a war time context they are not so economical as the improved hydrodynamics and reduced storms might otherwise suggest.
1
@Orlunu it's not that it is "distasteful". I absolutely love good weapons in the right hands. It is that weapons produce nothing but dead bodies and since we cannot eat them they are quite useless. War is not productive.
1
@thumper8684 i know! he is so intellectually dishonest, never cites sources, never does basic reading, never follows up questions and never tells his audience when they are full of shit as a christmas goose. hi!
1
@BitterComments "Why would any country expend military resources in response to a transient economic downturn caused by a transient pandemic?" Wuhan Institute of Virology? We know exactly what really happened.
1