WWII

Ben2St1d_5022

No facts to any public outlets. I mean he is the Commander in Chief and knows exactly how successful the operation was. One for the history books and for military strategy. It was only one of the most precise and successful airborne U.S. military operations ever. WWII and now this. Move your hatred and TDS aside and admit the facts now they’re known and understood for the most part. This operation was immensely successful. On many different fronts as well.

careyectr

Yes, better entry prices do show up after record highs—but they usually arrive more slowly, and cost more in missed upside, than most of us expect. A quick reality-check on how often the market “gives you a dip”: New highs are followed by small pullbacks all the time. LPL’s long-term data show the S&P 500 averages roughly three drawdowns of -5 % to -10 % every year, and it suffers at least one 10 % correction in about two-thirds of calendar years.  When you sharpen the pencil to “How long do I have to wait?” the numbers get uncomfortable. A Clearnomics study looking at all post-WWII highs found that an investor who insisted on a -3 % pullback sat in cash for about 69 days on average and still missed ~2 % of upside while waiting. Holding out for a textbook -5 % discount stretched the wait to 291 days and forfeited roughly 13 % in foregone gains. My own Nasdaq-100 back-test (1985-2025 daily closes) echoes that pattern: • Median maximum drawdown within six months of an all-time high: -4.7 % • A dip of -5 % or worse has occurred in ~60 % of those six-month windows. • A deeper -10 % correction shows up only ~23 % of the time—and when it does, the index usually ends the same six-month span higher anyway. In plain English: you often get a wiggle room of 3-5 %, you sometimes get 8-10 %, and you rarely get the 15-20 % “fat pitch” while the longer-term trend is still rising. ⸻ What that means if you’re still on the sidelines Staying uninvested for the possibility of a pullback is itself a market call. History says the cost of waiting grows quickly unless the dip materialises fast, and that cost compounds if the trend keeps grinding upward. If you need to get money to work but want a margin of safety: – Split the stake. Put, say, half to work now and stage the rest in tranches every few weeks or at predefined technical levels (50-day or 100-day moving average supports often coincide with 3-6 % give-backs). – Pair entries with a decision rule for when to stop averaging down (for example, if QQQ falls 12-15 % you reassess fundamentals rather than automatically buying more). – Alternatively, use an options collar or a 5-10 % stop-loss to cap the downside while still getting market exposure; that lets the “waiting” budget pay for hedges instead of idle cash. ⸻ Bottom line Better prices are possible—small dips are statistically likely and larger ones remain a non-trivial risk—but the market’s default state after a fresh high is gradual follow-through, not immediate reversal. If your time horizon is months to years, scaling in beats sitting out; if your horizon is days to weeks, set clear levels and be ready to act quickly when they appear.

-jinxiii

I was more referencing the WWII pushing countries out of the Great Depression. But admittedly Vietnam wars effect was a blind spot.  Either way I’m not surprised with the current love affair with public traded companies with govt contracts (see Steve Miller and co.)

Next-Problem728

WWI folks didn’t think WWII would happen in their lifetimes.

__thr0wm3Inth3trash

New House bill projects more debt burden than fucking post-WWII levels, how is the regard circus still functional

accruedainterest

That’s actually crazy. Everyone remembers the headline “ceasefire broken within hours” but when there’s no attacks between them for weeks, no one realizes just cuz there’s no headline? That was my entire point. Did you think in WWII all the fighting stopped immediately just cuz Germany and Japan surrendered?

EventHorizonbyGA

That is not true. By a long shot. The US is just retracting back to the mean. Post WWII, the US had a monopoly on manufacturing and since the 1970s been the dominate banking center. People who were fortunate enough to live through this time period in US History had very easy lives. But, that monopoly was lost in the late 1970s and now the rest of the world is eroding trust in the dollar. So the average American is just falling back to the world mean. Which is traumatic for most.

MiddleOccasion1394

... a ceasefire is not "ended". By that definition, the Civil War, the Revolutionary War, WWI and WWII are still in a ceasefire.

bobbymcpresscot

Over money. It’s always over money lol.  We weren’t talking design requirements so I don’t know why you mentioned it. The US has been at war 222 years of its almost 250 years in existence.  The US also being involved in conflicts and wars since 1945 is also true. Korean war Vietnam war, proxy wars with the USSR during the Cold War, countless police actions in South America where the A10 was actually first used, gulf war, Afghanistan war, reinvaded iraq. Thats just since WWII and makes up damn near 75 of the last 80 years.  I don’t get why you would lie about the US and its love for war. 

ultrachem

Your entry into WWI was due to a facbricated Zimmermann Telegram and your entry into WWII was due to the Japanese so kindly fuck off will you

AmbitiousEconomics

Sure but the last war that was declared was what, WWII? The president can effectively declare war even without a formal declaration.

bobbymcpresscot

because 25% of the federal budget goes to the military the US is constantly picking fights in the middle east as a soft target to flood billions of dollars into the MIC to fight goat farmers. Good example is the A10, which was developed specifically for just the middle east, and in any real conflict it would never see the skies again because its too slow and fat. We've been doing this constantly since WWII. Since 1776 the US has been at war something like 222 of its 240 years of existence.

Buckets-of-Gold

It’s a very large number no matter how you split it. We have one of the highest debt to GDP in the developed world, behind only Japan, Singapore, Greece, and Italy. Internally, we have not seen a ratio this high since WWII. Our interest payments are about to eclipse total military spending/total spending on Medicare.

machogrande2

It's certainly not completely implausable considering how many times the US military has gotten its ass kicked since WWII. They may have the most things that go boom but they're shit at training and accomplishing goals.

frenchvanillax

What's with the down votes? Post-war market rallies: WWII +30% in 1946 Korean War +25% in 1954 Vietnam War +38% in 1975 Gulf War +28% in 1991 Iraq War +26% in 2003 Russia-Ukraine ... WWIII ...

The_real_Covfefe-19

We're giving Israel $3.9 billion a year on average since WWII, our own government acts as their lapdog, and now they're genociding Palestinians, torturing prisoners, bombing Iran, and dragging us into yet another Middle East boondoggle. It's infuriating. 

The_real_Covfefe-19

$318 billion given to Israel by the US since WWII. Insane. 

Educational_Peak_770

The US absolutely sucks ass at trying to support the country it invades. Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. But what is lost is these countries lose in fucking hours to the US military, then we spend the rest of the decade trying to rebuild. It’s why we were so successful in WWII — nobody comes close to our capability to just bombing the living daylights out of people.

floo82

Lol blockbuster video was actually named after the WWII bombs called blockbusters, so that would kinda be full circle there

FafnirSnap_9428

Exactly. Major powers entered and  came out of the war in a boom. But it didn't lift all boats.  I would blame that success for the rationale behind most wars post WWII as they were all trying to recapture what happened despite the fact that a global conflict like that hasn't and (I'll make the bold statement) won't happen again. 

BennyL1986

So was it Vietnam or during WWII?

3xonblack

#Between 1940 and 1945, during WWII, U.S. GDP increased 74%. Thank you for your attention to this matter

Confident-Court2171

It’s what we always do. We dominate from a military perspective, and lose the long term post war ground game. Last time we won that was WWII….

Comfortable-Pause279

There's a vast, vast difference between our Project for a New American Century nation-building exercises in the the 2000s through the 2020s and the Gulf War, which might as well been called "Operation: Well fuck *THOSE* guys." The US kept trying to rebuild countries we bombed, mostly because of the feel good legacy of WWII and Korea. I don't think Trump's team gives a fuck so we're just going to drop increasingly large bombs of counties and brag about it on Signal to reporters who shouldn't have been added.

averyburgreen

I agree, the US hasn’t really gone scorched earth since WWII. They’ve kind of been fighting on a leash, and it’s terrifying to think about the utter cataclysmic devastation that would occur should the entirety of the US armed forces be mobilized against an adversary.

BestKoreaEscapee

Japan. WWII. But seriously. Who said anyone needed to surrender? Control of the strait is the important part. Iran doesn’t need to surrender.

WinstonSalemSmith

I sold PPA at $115 and bought EUAD. Maybe a mistake, who knows. Both good WWII plays. Also EADSY.

imdaviddunn

Markets rose during and after us civil war, WWI, WWII. I guess the point is civilization keeps moving on. With that said, a fall of an empire wasn’t going for markets, see Roman, Spanish, British.

strip_club_dj

That's a bit of a stretch but the British pulled a lot of shenanigans redrawing borders post WWII. I would say the British, Spanish and Dutch are probably the worst offenders though as far as colonial atrocities are concerned.

TheGodShotter

Yea u/InevitableAd2436 , they are pre WWII suburbs with town centers. Scattered through out North America, before Levitt came in and created the new American Capitalism engine with his Levittowns.

TheGodShotter

I am not sure if you're being snarky. Its hard for me to pick up on sarcasm through this medium of communication. I know this has been said before, but after being a suburban single family homeowner for some years I strongly believe that American Capitalism was built on suburban homeownership, right after WWII with Levittowns. It is a system designed to keep you consuming. There are not many great alternatives for living in America since the ENTIRE ECONOMY is built upon this system.

Any-Wheel-9271

Assuming it's a relatively minor war, then it won't make a big difference. If a major war (WWI/WWII levels) brews, then you can trigger a much bigger sell off but that's much less likely.

bigworldrdt

Trump was worried about WWII starting at the Georgia Rally until he remembered that’s the one Putin fought in

Deesco5

If Americans get drafted and stop working to go fight that’s gonna cause some issues bud. Probably won’t happen but check out the economy after WWI and WWII.

APL9907

Appeasement “for now” is still appeasement — and history shows it doesn’t solve the problem, it delays it and makes it worse. That’s exactly how WWII escalated: small concessions led to greater demands. We’ve seen this pattern before, and we’re seeing it again. The idea that giving Putin land now will somehow resolve the territorial dispute and allow Ukraine into NATO later assumes he would actually stop. But Putin has shown — repeatedly — that he sees concessions as weakness and an opening to push further. He invaded Georgia in 2008, took Crimea in 2014, and launched a full-scale invasion in 2022. Giving him land doesn't end the conflict — it just moves the goalposts. If we reward aggression with territory, it signals that force works. It tells Putin — and others like him — that military expansion pays off if you apply enough pressure. That’s not a strategy for peace — it’s a dangerous precedent that makes the world less stable. And NATO won’t admit Ukraine while it has active territorial disputes. So appeasement doesn’t actually bring Ukraine closer to NATO — it potentially locks them out permanently, especially if Russia stirs up more unrest along any new “border.” As for aid — yes, it costs something. But the cost of not helping Ukraine defend itself is far greater. If Putin gets what he wants now, where does it stop next time? Moldova? The Baltics? It’s not about dragging NATO into a war — it’s about making sure we don’t have to. Peace is achieved through strength and resistance — not by conceding land and hoping for the best.

APL9907

You're misrepresenting what I said — I didn’t call for global war. That’s a strawman and a false dilemma. The point is: appeasement has historically failed. Giving land to an aggressor doesn't bring peace, it encourages future aggression. That’s exactly what happened with Hitler before WWII. We're not talking about sending NATO troops in. Continued sanctions and aid to Ukraine are what actually reduce the chance of a broader war. If we reward Putin with land, the question becomes: where do we draw the line next time? Peace through strength and resistance, not concession.

JimFlo69

You keep guzzling that military industrial complex kool aid. Meanwhile we haven’t won a war since WWII.

LordTegucigalpa

> will never be the same Never is a strong word. If reddit existed during WWII, this is what everyone would be saying about Germany and Japan.

Capable_Compote9268

Capitalism isn’t prevailing lmfao. The US created institutions to extract wealth from colonized nations post WWII and that is how our economy functions. We have no infrastructure, amenities, or services to actually prove that capitalism is prevailing, unless you consider the option to pay for overpriced commodities as prevailing

NoApartheidOnMars

Please no. We didn't fight WWII to be ruled by Germany

my5cworth

So this was how war bonds worked in WWII? Massive marketing to get folks to buy IOU's from the gov? The reward is profit, the risk is they lose the war & nothing matters anymore anyway?

RagingBearBull

WWII brought to you by Carls Jr. Israeli and Pakistan war, Sponsored by TBD

Ok-Analysis4121

Anyone else see the interview where 🥭 said Putin fought in WWII and Russia lost 51 million people? Yea, that's whose running our country right now

AP9384629344432

Iran's air force is incredible out-dated, like early Cold War era. This was never a threat to Israeli aircraft. They would be instantly shot down. The major threats to Israeli aircraft were its radar network + surface to air missiles (the Russian S300 being the biggest threat). In 2024, an Israeli mission took out some of the radar for the S300, claiming Iran was now vulnerable to aerial attacks. It turned out they weren't lying, and they were able to fly in dozens of stealth fighters in the past few 48 hours with ease. Still, the paths were narrow. Today they claim to have completely eliminated took out remaining air defense assets, which is why you'll see chaotic fire from 'dumb' AA guns like it's WWII. This means the jets will fly unrestrained over even the capital, like it is Lebanon or Gaza.

omigula

i’m so tired of the middle east. why did the US and allied forces during WWI and WWII draw their borders without understanding their opposing cultural and religious beliefs, whether it be sunni and shias muslim sects of faith, hindus and muslims in India and Pakistans…and btw, let’s pack in another religious ethnostate of Israel in the mix right in the middle

herkyjerkyperky

Criticizing Russia is to dangerous and might lead to WWII. Full support for Israel bombing and occupying Gaza, South Lebanon and parts of Syria is no big deal.

barelyreadsenglish

https://x.com/BulwarkOnline/status/1933207285733756966 Trump: "Russia fought with us in WWII and everybody hates them. And Germany and Japan, they're fine — some day somebody will explain that...Everybody hates Russia and they love Germany and Japan...It's a strange world." WW2 round 2 is bullish

Mister_Way

Trump is accelerating what was already an ongoing, inevitable process. After WWII, the U.S. was the only major industrial power left unscathed. Since that time, other industrialized nations have recovered, and unindustrialized nations have caught up in modernization. Our relative position head and shoulders above the world was never going to remain that way, without extreme global oppression by the U.S. keeping **everyone** else down -- which was never our strategy or goal. Trump and his stupid policies are a \*reaction to\* falling U.S. dominance, more than they are a \*cause of\* them.

stoked_7

Interestingly, Hershey did have multiple government contracts during WWII

Rustic_gan123

The issue is trade restrictions, China has a trade surplus of $1 trillion and whoever tells you about a natural advantage, in a free economy there are mechanisms that will lead to this being balanced out naturally, this suggests that China is much more mercantile than everyone else, even without looking at specific cases, industries and policies and the nature of trade after WWII and the Cold War. Trump's methods are irrational, but they have a valid reason: international trade is less free than many are willing to admit, and that creates a lot of problems.

JRshoe1997

I love these types of comments. “Oh iMaGinE bEiNg sO yOuNg”. Yeah imagine someone being this young and in the market less time but still making more money and better investing decisions than you. https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/05/02/investing/us-stock-market There you go. We had the biggest winning streak in the S&P in over 20 years. https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2025/04/09/stock-market-posts-third-biggest-gain-in-post-wwii-history-on-trumps-tariff-about-face.html Also we had the third biggest single day rally since WWII. https://www.fool.com/investing/2025/06/09/sp-500-did-something-unseen-years-move-stocks/ Also the indexes posted their biggest gain in the month of May since 1990. But yeah tell me you didn’t get to experience any of these rallies without telling me you didn’t get to experience them. Username really does check out. Someone is just jealous they sold at the bottom in April.

PromiseCC

Is it more severe than WWI and WWII? If not, buy it, don't believe any economists or the news. They are all idiot. . Look at the DJI in WWI & WWII, and DJI now. Also, look at the S&P in 2008 and now. Which one is higher??

ChollyWheels

Hell, yes. 2/3rds in plain ol' CDs and the rest ETFs of foreign bonds (like iGOV) and tiny amounts in silver and Swiss Francs. I missed the partial recovery since tariff liberation day, but I don't care. Rough waters, dead ahead. These are historic times. The secret of the USA's power for 170 years was its energy production -- for most of that period being the largest single producer. WWII was won on American oil. Ultimately money is energy and prosperity is energy per capita and it made us powerful and wasteful. It's the big reason the dollar became the reserve currency -- ultimately backed by the petroleum and natural gas used in agriculture, manufacturing, and for the hot baths we take as normal (they weren't normal even 100 years ago). Now USA oil production -- extended with the miracle fracking -- has peaked. It will decline and take our arrogance and massive military with it. Add to that we can tell what actions of government are stupid, which are merely crypto grift, and which are literally Soviet funded designed to wound us -- with the result NATO and the post-WWII stability and FDR ideals are threatened or fundamentally dead. So it's not normal times. The usual pieties about the market alway coming back do not apply. Suggestion: buy dry beans (the only unequivocally valuable and durable asset) and learn Chinese.

dfsw

Look at the stock market during the Civil war, WWI, and WWII to get a feel for how they responded. Short answer is not as bad as you think

Any_Map468

The US hasn't won a war since WWII.

Maleficent-Finish694

WWI and WWII was started from the oval office?! Not sure if Merz really likes to hear that?

IcestormsEd

BINGO was first used by WWII pilots to signal low fuel. Many theorize it came from the game BINGO, which means game over.

wtf_yoda

While historic data is interesting, and useful in context, the global financial environment today is pretty different from what it was even just 25 years ago. If you go all the way back to the 70s or 80s, things were dramatically different then compared to today as far as supply and demand pressures for gold The biggest change going on today is that the world is becoming less dominated by the US both militarily and financially. Though the dollar is still the global reserve currency, countries are increasingly doing international trade in alternative currencies, like Euros and Yuan. In terms of geopolitics, the US has moved away from traditional post WWII alliances, and more towards transactional interaction with other countries where the interests of each nation shift depending on the matter being negotiated. It is increasingly in every sovereign state's interest to become less financially dependant on the US. Diversifying the holdings of their central banks and sovereign wealth funds is one big way to do that. Having some US bonds may give them some leverage with the US, but not so much that their fortunes are bound at the hip. This issue was made clear in 2022 when a sizable portion of Russia's state funds were frozen by the US and Europe. China in particular took note, but they were not alone. With trade and defense even Europe is learning this lesson now. Gold is a hard asset not controlled by any authority. It's a store of value not subject to devaluation the way fiat currencies can be. Given rising levels of government debt (compared to GDPs), that is particularly germane today. There may come a time when a cascade of events may cause multiple governments to decide between defaulting on their debt, or inflating away the debt by devaluing their currency. Japan unfortunately may be the canary in the coal mine. Japan's current debt to gdp is over 200, and heading higher. For a while they could sustain this normally unthinkable level of debt because the rates on their government bonds were so low. If you look at the rate on Japanese long bonds, they have been steadily rising since 2022. While it's still 2 to 3%, it makes a big difference when they were paying 0 to 1 percent pre-pandemic. The carry trade unwinding may mean upward pressure on US rates as well. Regardless, investors may get increasingly nervous about other countries with high debt levels (the US included), and governments will be forced by the market to pay higher rates, making it even harder to service their already high debt levels. As you might expect given the current climate, central governments have been net buyers of gold for 16 consecutive years, and they buy by the ton. If anything surging demand for precious metals, crypto and the like may just be getting started.

Quirky-Plantain-2080

I don’t know if you know this, but battleships have been obsolete since WWII. It is what military theorists call „an evolutionary dead end.”

SoylentGrunt

I think that's the point. Why? Your guess is as good as mine. But they know the outcome of this madness. What's *really* going on? Is it simply a matter of bash and dash for self enrichment? Surely the big money could stop such a crude play. Blame what's coming on China so they can sell us on the idea of a war with China? Funny how WWII came along and bailed so many out of the Great Depression. Whatever's going on they using us as cannon fodder.

Bitter-Condition9591

We had that after WWII with a very conservative Republican POTUS that paid it off by taxing the extraction class. That will never happen now because Republican voters worship extreme wealth over God, family or country. We are very fucked.

FILTHBOT4000

Wages go up because a huge portion of your workforce is out getting shot at, so the labor pool drops to nothing. That puts a huge hit on productivity, as does shifting manufacturing things beneficial to an economy to making munitions and such. All the 'induced demand' is for weapons, and you get to enjoy rationing. I don't know of any new investments going out in a wartime economy, aside from investing in repairing tons of leveled structures. You're not going to invest in making a new SUV when 90% of your steel needs to go into tanks/planes/guns. WWII wasn't as bad for us on that front because we never had to fear the Axis being so stupid as to attempt a mainland invasion of the US; "gun behind every blade of grass" and all that.

bullwinkle8088

> Hawaii would be okay No worries, just like WWII Hawaii has always been a tarket for several warheads. Everything would be horrible there at the same time as everywhere else. I mean if Mississippi is a target what makes you think they would miss Pearl Harbor?

ytman

China being war mongering in the rest of the world (excluding its own civil war) is not something we've seen in the last 30 years. The US and other nations have clearly warred more than China. The post WWII era and post Cold War era.l are quite different from each other. There is no embargo or arms race or blatant proxy antagonism between China/US like there was with the Soviet and West.  In fact where China is doing business deals, the US is the one now claiming that it may use force on contemporary Allies in order to take land/resorces for itself. In my read the only people proposing cold-war like stances with China, and fear of China as a military threat ready to invade/strike nuclear powers because why not, are Military Contractors and Ghouls of the deep state.

dritu_

I don't disagree; over the long term, the US market has outperformed. I just don't know whether or not we can expect the next 10-30 years to resemble the last 50. We were the main beneficiaries of a globalizing world while our economy was unmarred by WWII. We don't have the same tailwinds today but we could continue to outperform. Depends when you need your money, I guess.

signoi-

The German army in WWII were widely using meth… And his Seig Heils to the rally crowds looked extreme manic. What are the odds he was sober when he decided to do that?

signoi-

The German army in WWII were widely using meth… And his Seig Heils to the rally crowds looked extreme manic. What are the odds he was sober when he decided to do that?

signoi-

The German army in WWII were widely using meth.. And his Seig Heils to the rally goers looked extremely manic. What are the odds he was sober when he decided to do that?

muay_throwaway

The last time Congress declared war was WWII. But the other wars still happened after that.

Country_Gravy420

Greenest since WWII

cafedude

Since you're young and in this for the long haul you should consider the long term effects of the current administration's policies. The US University system has been the best in the world since WWII and has led the world in scientific research - that research in turn has driven much of the tech innovation in this country for the last 60 years or so. Now the current administration seems to want to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. You won't notice an immediate effect, but over the next decade and beyond we'll definitely be noticing the economic effects - slower growth, faster transition to China being the leading tech hub, etc.

sanduskyjack

Reddit is there anyway you can stop giving this moronic child constant advertising. I have been on Reddit for over 10 years and I don’t remember so many enlarged idiot posts from anyone. It’s just like our media Trump is out there telling us his administration is the best that has ever existed. Same happened during his first term when Trump was telling us Light and insecticide would kill COVID. Then he asked, while on cable, Debra Birx to look into this. That should have been the Gong Show Moment - when a giant hook came on the stage and dragged fat boy off. Our media is selling Trump. I don’t remember a post on here, X or anywhere which states the opinion promoted by this guest are not supported. By your inaction millions believe what he is saying. I am perplexed. Why doesn’t our media spend their time under our bridges interviewing those sad people who live there. They have as much credibility. It is the media’s job to tell the truth. The inaction is telling the rest of us it doesn’t matter if you prevaricate. I am wondering when legal cases are going to reference Trump’s as a reason a crime is not really a crime. “…The Generals have been reduced to rubble…They have been reduced to a point where it’s embarrassing to our country…” Torture works. Ok, folks?” You know, I have these guys – ‘Torture doesn’t work!’ – believe me, it works. And waterboarding is your minor form. “It is always a great honor to be so nicely complimented by a man so highly respected within his own country and beyond.” "Global warming is fine because we'll have more oceanfront property. " The way I understand geography and physics, if anything we'll LOSE coastline. If I happen to be president and I see somebody who’s doing well and beating me very badly, I say go down and indict them, mostly they would be out of business. They’d be out. They’d be out of the election. He has been and is doing this. “I was down there and I watched our police and our firemen down there on 7/11,” Trump told his at the rally in Buffalo, New York. Trump is talking about 9/11. “And I met with the president of the Virgin Islands,” Trump added, seemingly unaware that the Virgin Islands is a US territory, making him their president. t a White House press briefing, Mr Trump inaccurately claimed that the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic helped end WWII – a conflict that didn’t even start until two decades later.

Kurso

WTF. Do you not understand the level of rationing that occurred in the US? Resources, food, clothes, medicine. It was so bad we had a national speed limit of 35MPH... Imagine taking a roadtrip at 35MPH. Travel was restricted and tourism basically halted. US citizen were rounded up. Wages were frozen. If you think today is worse than WWII for the US I feel sorry for the level of ignorance you live in.

2398476dguidso

We were losing WWII until Midway/Stalingrad.

human_trainingwheels

That second point is a really important one that people don’t ever think about. During the U.S. “Golden Age” for manufacturing you could impose tariffs or whatever other means you wished because the rest of the world was still recovering from WWII, other had no choice but to pay it. Now that other countries have recovered their infrastructure it’s an open market plus shipping is no longer the impediment it once was. Impose a tariff, buyers just go elsewhere.

Skurttish

Post WWII, I agree with you. Pre WWII, there’s all kinds of wild stuff, but the American stock market wasn’t what it is now and neither was its military. America was a kind of large, unique banana republic for a long time, but that can’t really be compared with today. So I take your point. Really what I was pushing back at was the idea that America cannot recover from what Trump has done. I don’t think that’s true, because a recovery is always possible where investors stand to make money, because so much of the American economic system runs through the stock market. It’s easy for me to imagine a successor to Trump reversing a few policies and boom, the US is right back to where we were, because investors want to see the US successful. They’ll make it happen because they stand to gain from it. But that’s a different topic. As to your comment, yes, I think my comment misrepresented American history.

IceCreamAndRock

Yes! Unless all materials are made domestically, which hasn't been the case since WWII finished.

Red_Bullion

Idk WWII was pretty bad

Arche93

This is a zero sum game. There will always be another country to take our place, just like we did after WWII. When we go down, another country rises to the top. There is at least one contender for the current crown and they have a 100 year plan and a real authoritarian government, and a robust manufacturing sector. We will not survive this administration.

PerAsperaAdMars

I concur. Threatening Europe with withdrawing troops, annexing parts of it, and undermining its economy through tariffs while the Europe is in the middle of the biggest war since WWII is like stabbing your old friend in the back while he is sick and weak. And this is after the US became the only one to invoke NATO's Article 5, which led to the deaths of over a thousand European soldiers in Afghanistan. The damage to the relationship will last at least for decades. And the last thing the US needs right now is another enemy with a comparable economy after China has already started dumping US Treasuries. Rising Treasury rates could wreck the dollar, the New York Stock Exchange, and then the entire US economy. When it was the US vs. China, I think you'd handle it. But now Trump has pushed Canada, Mexico, and Europe to China's side. And China has already swayed much of Africa to their side even before USAID's destruction. I don't see how the US with Israel can win a confrontation against the rest of the world. Trump dramatically overestimated his leverage.

Faroutman1234

There is plenty of cash in the US to make this purchase but our investor bros don't want to put in the work to upgrade a steel plant. It's easier to hire a bunch of programmers and make a new AI app. The US should have backed a startup to upgrade USS with modern equipment. USS built the war machine that defeated the Axis Powers in WWII.

stan_cartman

This post is political by its very nature, but that's not my intention. I think it would be more accurate to say that Trump would stop helping Ukraine if Zelensky didn't sign the agreement. The fact that he cut off US intelligence reports to Ukraine immediately afterward only reinforces this. If Zelensky did not intend to sign the agreement, he never would have made the trip in the first place. Things went south after he told Vance that Putin had a history of not honoring previous agreements. Russia has yet to make any concessions, and everything Putin has done only confirms what Zelensky said. Many consider what happened that day to be the most significant shift in US foreign policy since the end of WWII. Nothing I've said in this post is political

Suitable-Reserve-891

Think about what you just said. We destroyed Germany and then paid to rebuild it, and the list of wars goes on endlessly where this has happened. Do you honestly think that was/is the answer. What about all those poor farming families in Vietnam that were killed…what did they do. All I’m saying is there’s a better way. We are all in agree or fight mode anymore it seems. Why can’t we all just get along. Getting back to WWII, don’t you think that Hitler could have been surgically removed? Was bombing everyone necessary?

Advanced_Worry_5525

The man can fold faster than France in WWII

Bondarelu

The 🍊is so full of 💩 1. EU Formation Purpose Claim: The EU was formed to take advantage of the U.S. on trade. • Source: European Union official history – EUropa.eu • Facts: The EU evolved from post-WWII treaties (Treaty of Rome 1957, Maastricht 1993) to promote peace, economic integration, and avoid future wars—not to target any external economy. • Conclusion: False. No credible economic source supports this claim. ⸻ 2. Trade Barriers & VAT Taxes Claim: The EU uses powerful trade barriers and VAT taxes to harm the U.S. • Trade Barriers: • Source: World Trade Organization (WTO) • Facts: Both EU and U.S. have average applied MFN tariffs between 2–4%. Sectors like agriculture or autos may be higher, but such differences are normal in trade policy. • Conclusion: Partially true, but exaggerated. Both sides apply trade rules within WTO norms. • VAT Taxes: • Source: OECD / European Commission • Facts: VAT is applied equally to all goods, domestic and foreign. The U.S. does not have VAT, but that doesn’t make the EU’s VAT discriminatory. • Conclusion: Misleading. VAT is not a protectionist tool. ⸻ 3. Corporate Penalties and Lawsuits Claim: EU fines U.S. companies unfairly. • Source: European Commission Competition Directorate • Facts: The EU fined companies like Google ($5B), Apple ($14B in tax), Meta—based on antitrust laws or GDPR violations. • U.S. Comparison: The U.S. FTC and DoJ also fine companies, but regulatory standards differ. • Conclusion: Subjective. Based on enforceable EU laws—not uniquely targeted at U.S. firms. ⸻ 4. Monetary Manipulation Claim: The EU engages in monetary manipulation. • Source: International Monetary Fund (IMF) External Sector Report • Facts: The European Central Bank (ECB) maintains eurozone stability and inflation targets. The euro is not undervalued in a way that meets U.S. Treasury thresholds for “currency manipulation.” • Conclusion: False. No reputable institution considers the EU a currency manipulator. ⸻ 5. U.S.-EU Trade Deficit ($250B) Claim: U.S. has a $250B trade deficit with the EU. • Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Trade Data • Facts (2023 data): • Goods trade deficit: ~$202 billion • Services trade surplus: ~$60 billion • Net trade deficit: closer to $140–$150 billion • Conclusion: Exaggerated. The number is inflated by ignoring services. ⸻ 6. Proposed 50% Tariff Claim: Trump recommends a 50% tariff on EU goods. • Source: U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), WTO • Facts: A 50% blanket tariff would violate WTO rules, risk EU retaliation, and likely raise prices for U.S. consumers. • Historical Parallel: 2018 U.S. tariffs on EU steel (25%) triggered retaliatory tariffs on American goods (e.g., Harley-Davidson, bourbon). • Conclusion: Policy proposal, but economically risky.

Repulsive_Suit2900

Sorry friend, we know you exist and we know you don't deserve this. But the unfortunate truth is that once was a forgivable mistake, but twice is a choice. Half of all American voters - enough people for an entire continent - have made it irrefutably clear to us that they no longer want America to be the educated democratic republic leading the world as a military superpower aligned with the WWII allies instead of the axis nations, they no longer want to have to be the international reserve currency, and no longer want to be the economic powerhouse for global equity investments nor participate in mutually beneficial trade agreements. The USA's decline was already well on its way; 2016 and 2024 just rapidly accelerated the timeline. Even if we were to normalize our relations again, it wouldn't matter much. The future belongs now to China, and Europe will have to be the allied powers opposing foreign imperialism like Russia.

dlonorse

As usual, Trump doesn’t know much about history. He’s repeated the “take advantage of the U. S. on trade” lie many times. Here’s an outline dating back to the end of WWII of how the EU became what it is today: The European Union (EU) emerged from the wreckage of World War II as a peace project aimed at fostering economic and political stability in Europe. Here’s a concise historical timeline of its formation: ⸻ 1. Post-WWII Foundations (1945–1951) • Goal: Prevent future wars by integrating economies. • 1946: Winston Churchill calls for a “United States of Europe.” • 1949: Council of Europe is formed to promote human rights and democracy—but with limited powers. ⸻ 2. European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) – 1951 • Treaty of Paris (1951): Signed by France, West Germany, Italy, Belgium, Netherlands, and Luxembourg. • Created a common market for coal and steel, industries critical for war, under a supranational authority. • First real step toward economic integration. ⸻ 3. Treaty of Rome and the EEC – 1957 • Treaty of Rome (1957): Established the European Economic Community (EEC) and Euratom (for nuclear cooperation). • Aimed to create a common market and customs union. • Initial six countries remained the core: France, West Germany, Italy, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg. ⸻ 4. Expansion and Deepening – 1970s–1980s • New members joined: • 1973: UK, Ireland, Denmark • 1981: Greece • 1986: Spain, Portugal • Institutions grew stronger; the Single European Act (1986) set the stage for a single market. ⸻ 5. Maastricht Treaty and Birth of the EU – 1993 • Treaty of Maastricht (1992): Formally established the European Union in 1993. • Created three pillars: 1. European Communities (economic integration) 2. Common Foreign and Security Policy 3. Justice and Home Affairs • Introduced the euro and European citizenship. ⸻ 6. Eurozone and Eastern Enlargement – 1999–2007 • 1999: Euro introduced in non-physical form; 2002: euro banknotes and coins launched. • Former Eastern Bloc countries joined: • 2004: 10 new countries, including Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic • 2007: Romania and Bulgaria • EU expanded to 27 members by 2007. ⸻ 7. Lisbon Treaty and Modern EU – 2009 • Lisbon Treaty (2007, in force 2009): Streamlined institutions, created the President of the European Council and High Representative for Foreign Affairs. • Strengthened role of the European Parliament and EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. ⸻ 8. Recent Developments • 2013: Croatia becomes the 28th member. • 2020: Brexit – the UK formally leaves the EU. • The EU today balances integration with rising nationalism, economic inequality, and global geopolitical pressures.

juluss

I'm half european. I live in Canada now. If I remember well what they have teached in schools there, European Union was created after WWII to unite countries and to not have another war couple years later. I don't remember a teacher saying Eurepean Union was created in any way to take advantage of the US on trade. But hey, it's been years ago, so maybe I'm wrong. Unless he is talking not about EU but the continent ? Which would be really more stupid, and should go on r/ShitAmericansSay. Maybe everything he says should go there. And by the way, what's this deficit shit he's talking about ? Does he expect each country in a deal to sell and buy the exact same amount of things ? Do I have a deficit with Costco because I bought a 1.5$ hotdog ? Or they have one with me ? How this thing works ??

WhiskyEchoTango

WTF is he on about? The EU was created with the encouragement of the United States, evolving over time from the Treaty of Paris that officially ended WWII, the idea behind it that closer economic ties between European nations would reduce the chances of another major war between the European nations, who had been engaged in major wars on average every 30 years for 17 centuries (end of Pax Romana) Some people really need to learn a history. But you know they never open a book.

Fresh_Internal_6085

I just can’t deal with his lies. They are so egregious it’s just gobsmacking. 🥭 says “The European Union…was formed for the primary purpose of taking advantage of the United States on TRADE.” Utter bullshit. The EU was formed to prevent another war in Europe post-WWII by promoting economic cooperation—specifically between France and Germany. The U.S. actually supported European integration (think: the Marshall Plan).

insertwittynamethere

I try and explain this to Americans, that once could be forgiven as a mistake, an aberration. But that *twice*, especially after COVID response being bungled and the coup attemptnon Jan 6, plus the many different legal cases surrounding the fraud attempt to stay in power after the Nov. 2020 election? Yeah, no. This is a generational stain that will not be removed just because the power maybe switches with free and fair elections in 2026 and 2028. But it doesn't matter, because we are now 1 election away from another Trump, and we've shown our education and intelligence level, pur and simple, to give other nations who may rely on us pause. Wiped away 80 years of post-WWII history and positioning within less than 3 months. We just haven't felt the full impact of it, but our allies are certainly planning on how to inoculate themselves from a US that has broken bad, while trying to also still toe the lines so that they are not the ones who truly stopped trying to be an ally with the US.

leomeng

I was watching WWI and WWII videos over the weekend and think it’s possible. When things get really ugly things happen.

Seattleman1955

There's actually a lot in your question but to give a more direct answer first, you can't diversify your way out of systemic risk. You can buy utilities and consumer stocks and they will decline less but they will decline. You have to get out of they system to diversify that, such as gold or Bitcoin. The more interesting aspect (to me) is talking about the Great Depression. It's this watershed moment in our history that no one wants to repeat and yet we generally think the government, with the New Deal, ended it and is why we haven't had another one as if it is the "Progressive" policies that kept another one from happening. That's not the case. The Great Depression should have been just another recession. Poor government decisions turned it into the Great Depression and then the policies that ended it (really WWII) are the policies that can end anything over the short-term (spending a lot of money-think Covid) but resulting with all the problems that we have dealt with ever since (debt). The lesson from the Great Depression shouldn't be the elevation of FDR as a hero with the New Deal. It should be that "we" talk an average recession and turned it into the Great Depression. We didn't backstop the banks regarding deposit money so we had bank runs on every bank. We enacted massive tariffs to "protect" American jobs and other countries did the same and the economy declined. Many farmers lost their farms, wage workers lost their jobs because of the declining economy and yet many areas of the country were OK relatively speaking. If you were a farmer who owned their land, you could still feed yourself and live didn't change drastically. The stock market aspect was a reflection of the "roaring 20s". You had cab drivers taking out loans to buy stocks that "only went up". That's leverage. So of course all that came crumbling down. That corrects itself in a year or two. The mistakes with banks and tariffs is what turns a stock market recession into a Great Depression and the New Deal isn't what ended it. That was only marginally more efficient than Biden sending everyone a "stimulus check". Most of our problems since then are a direct result from the New Deal programs such as a poorly designed Social Security and Medicare program. Then we came off the gold standard and there was nothing holding Congress back from unlimited spending and the debt has only gone up since then. To bring it back to this conversation, a recession isn't really want we need to worry about. There are cycles of bull and bear markets and they each usually last about 2 years. Debt being monetized is what will bring the system down eventually. Even that is a little too dramatic. The dollar will still be better than most other fiat currencies but "we" might not like the changes that are bound to occur to deal with all the debt. I have stocks and bitcoin (and my house) because that's all I can control.

treblig111

Two things I can think are happening here. 1 is easy…. They’ll hand it to their billionaire friends to run it. If there are profits, we the people won’t see it. 2 they think the government should be run like a business. ITS NOT! It’s a god damn SOCIETY they are supposed to be running. After the dust bowl we said never again. After WWII we said never again. After the theft of billions from every day people by corporations we said never again!! These fucks are removing all the guardrails we put in place when we fucked the first time. I hate this timeline.

headcodered

I don't know why you're getting downvoted so bad, there's a lot of truth here. I think maybe they think you're suggesting that it's a good thing, but that's not how I read it. I was reading up on some of the history of our economic relations with Japan yesterday and the final stake in the heart of our relationship with them before they attacked Pearl Harbor a few years later was when we embargoed steel and oil trade with them during the Second Sino-Japanese War. Economic moves have lead to military backlash plenty of times in history and world leaders know this. In 2025, I don't think it would play out like WWII but our military power is a legitimately massive variable in the global economy.

Portfoliana

This is only the second time in modern history that the U.S. credit rating has been downgraded – the first being in 2011 when S&P cut it from AAA to AA+. Back then, markets initially sold off, but Treasuries ironically *rallied*, as investors still viewed them as the global safe haven. What followed was a period of extreme political dysfunction (the debt ceiling crisis under Obama), but economically, the U.S. continued to chug along with low rates and solid growth. The downgrade didn’t materially increase borrowing costs – at least not immediately. What’s different now? * Debt-to-GDP is much higher (\~120% vs. \~95% in 2011) * Interest payments are now over 15% of federal revenue – a post-WWII high * The Fed is no longer suppressing yields with QE * Geopolitical competition (China, BRICS, etc.) raises questions about dollar dominance So while the downgrade itself might not spark a crisis, it’s a symptom of a larger structural problem. Investors should watch *real* yields, dollar demand, and auction coverage going forward – not just the headline rating.

Ellen_1234

Certainly! The first chapter of The Fourth Turning (1997) by William Strauss and Neil Howe — not 1992 — sets the stage for their generational theory by explaining why history moves in cycles, not in a linear path of progress or decline. Summary of Chapter 1: "Winter Comes Again" The authors argue that modern societies misunderstand history, seeing it as either a steady upward march (progressivism) or a slow collapse (declinism). Instead, they introduce the idea that history unfolds in recurring 80–100 year cycles, called "saecula," each composed of four turnings (like seasons): 1. High (Spring) 2. Awakening (Summer) 3. Unraveling (Autumn) 4. Crisis (Winter) They assert that America is entering a Fourth Turning — a crisis era — that will likely bring upheaval, transformation, and the rebirth of national identity. The chapter gives historical examples (American Revolution, Civil War, Great Depression/WWII) to show that Fourth Turnings are predictable, recurring, and transformative. It warns that while such periods can be dangerous and chaotic, they are also opportunities for renewal and the emergence of new institutions. The tone is serious, almost prophetic — the authors want the reader to sense that a major historical shift is imminent, and understanding the generational patterns will help us prepare for what’s coming. Would you like a summary of the next chapter too, or a diagram of the four turnings? *

fleebinflobin

no one gives a fuck about moody. Haven't downgraded since WWII when every other rater actually was changing their ratings. Were the fucking asleep? Forgot they, you know, should have done that in 2008? They're irrelevant.

Euthyphraud

I personally believe we will see a K-shaped recession, meaning that entire sectors and many industries will contract into a true recession while a smaller number of specific industries continue to outperform or even increase further in profitability. Controversially I think it applies to the whole 'AI/Data Center' trade. Most expected the hyperscalers to suggest they are cutting back on capex while seeing diminished guidance and earnings misses from companies involved in building data centers primarily for AI. However that is the opposite of what we see, with the most AI/Data Centered companies proving highly resilient and at worst meeting expectations. CapEx spending is actually likely to continue *increasing* with the rise of sovereign AI and countries seizing on the idea that it is critical to any country's national security. I personally believe we are in the early innings of a new global race for AI superiority, with most countries seeing government owned data centers running government controlled AI are seen as necessary for security and economic competition. *AI and Data Centers represent the new nuclear arms race.* The more some countries pursue it, the more necessary it becomes for other countries to do so as well. The consideration in the pursuit of it will be primarily due to national security concerns, meaning that trying to keep costs low and a slowdown in economically hard times are much less likely considerations driving profitability in the industry. I am cautiously remaining heavily investing in the AI/Data Center supply chain. It's overvalued right now and I am holding, not buying. However I do believe that these stocks will continue to outperform over the coming years. The global economic order that has been in place not only from the end of the gold standard to today but rather in place sense the end of WWII is gone. It's skeleton remains in place, but it is deteriorating. We are witnessing a 'regionalization' where we see blocs of allied countries cooperating as a unit with other such alliances. The EU, China, India, Brazil, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Japan, South Korea, etc. will all be separate poles of influence with most being some sort of superpower alongside the USA. Most global supply chains that remain intact after Covid will begin to collapse and undergo massive transformations aimed at autarkic approaches to industrial development, and in more liberal countries friendshoring as well. We cannot expect the rules that have dictated the performance of stocks to remain the same as they have been for the past 80 years. There are new rules still being written. The new global economic and geopolitical order will take at least a decade, likely two, to fully 'settle' into a new equilibrium with clearer, reformed new rules and institutions. How valuations are considered, what factors drive stock premiums, changing views on industries central to the new economic focuses of most countries, etc. are all up in the air. There isn't a strong reason to believe that traditional metrics for valuation like P/E; PEG; Cash Flow, etc. will continue to maintain or revert to their pre-Covid significance. The economy, valuations and how stock price movements are determined no longer play by the old rules and the new rules are mostly yet to be written. We're in a wild west period for investing where uncertainty and volatility are likely to be greatly exacerbated for many years.

matt2621

eh it depends but not in the way you worded the question. I have an econ degree and there are certainly things in the market I understand more than the average person, however, it doesn't really do anything for "strategies/predicting the market" as you just asked. About a month ago is a great example. Nasdaq was down 2% to start the day and the announcement of a 90 day pause in China tariffs made it end the day up +12%, its largest gain since WWII. No amount of economic understanding would have been able to get you in the market and predict that that announcement was coming. If learning basic economics is of interest to you, go for it. But, don't take the time to teach yourself just to try to beat the market. Just stick your money in an S&P 500 fund and let the market give you 10%/yr average like it has for 70 years. There are so many hedge funds that try CONSTANTLY to beat the market on a consistent basis to no avail. It's just not a realistic long term strategy.