WWII

I_am_Nerman

Imagine the greatest generation typing something like this when the US entered WWII

PartTime_Crusader

The US used silver to mint nickels during WWII when the other metals were needed for the war effort. So if you really wanted to min-max the value of your nickel collection, you'd have to search each one of those coin rolls to pull out the war nickels (and other collector coins of interest)

sweeetscience

1 and 3. You’re talking about politics, which is a different animal than ideas, which is what I’m talking about. It’s extremely difficult to get cosponsors for radical ideas, and that’s exactly what we need. I argued the same point with a republican friend of mine at the time - he lost. But the political machine _spent so much money to make sure he lost._ I really, really don’t want to get into the politics of 2016 because it really and truly doesn’t fucking matter. He’s allowed to be slightly bitter after the fact because he lost. He doesn’t talk about it unless he’s asked today. 2. You being slightly disingenuous or are miseries about what a demagogue is. If a specific group (billionaires/oligarchs) are committing specific acts (lobbying, campaign financing, etc) to affect a specific outcome (increased influence, lower taxes, monopolistic control, etc), and there’s well documented evidence for it, then calling out that group of people is not demagoguery, it’s an elected representative holding the system accountable. Something I put extremely high on my value list. 4. Again, radical ideas require radical mobilization, and congress isn’t there. Yet. But that doesn’t mean you have to give up believing in a good idea for the sake of pragmatism. Pragmatism is what got us to where we are today during the fallout of WWII. Bernie has cosponsored plenty of bills and lobbied in favor of plenty more that have done and/or would have done a lot of good for the average person. He voted for the ACA, despite having so many reservations about the insurance system and the siphoning of money out of the health care system by greedy middlemen. It was the _pragmatic_ vote, because it would have (and did for a time) have so many positive effects on the average person. It wasn’t perfect, and obstructionism and lobbying have made it even worse, which, for the record, is exactly what he warned about. Our problem is that we’re focusing too much on politics and not enough on the utility and ethical validity of ideas. The one thing you can’t argue about Bernie is that he literally wants everyone to succeed. Everyone. Even billionaires. Yes, as absurd as that sounds even billionaires should exist and succeed in our society, BUT, they have an moral responsibility to invest in the continuation and success of the structures that provided them the means to capture that wealth.

Impressive_Trick_573

No, no you stupid bull. The Japanese need their money back. The whole post WWII paradigm is over. Thanks for coming.

FearLeadsToAnger

> completely ignores the role that the US has played - for better or worse - in the world since WWII. A lot of what the US has done abroad since WWII hasn’t exactly been admirable (I was only going to mention 3 but then got carried away with all the middle-eastern stuff): Vietnam was about containing communism and showing commitment to Cold War allies. The price paid by Vietnam was mass civilian death, destroyed farmland, displacement and long term chemical contamination. Iran in 1953 was about keeping control of oil and blocking perceived Soviet influence. The side effect was removing an elected leader and propping up a dictatorship that eventually collapsed into a revolution that still shapes the region today. And we really have enjoyed fucking with the middle east in general, the US supported Mujahideen fighters against the Soviet occupation, funnelling money and weapons into groups that framed the conflict in religious terms. After the Soviets left and the country collapsed into civil war, the Taliban emerged from those same networks. The original motive was Cold War strategy, but the long term result was a highly conservative religious government. From that perspective, we setup september the 11th against ourselves. Libya too. During the late 60s and early 70s, the US and UK supported the monarchy because it kept oil stable and Western aligned. That government had almost no legitimacy at home and fell in 1969 in a coup led by Gaddafi, who positioned himself as an anti Western nationalist. He ran a weak government that left room for Islamist groups to gain influence simply because they had the networks and cohesion that the dismantled state no longer had and once again, US involvement turns a country into a conservative religious terror factory. Iraq was sold as disarming weapons of mass destruction and reshaping the Middle East. Reesult: state collapse, sectarian bloodshed, mass civilian casualties and the rise of groups like ISIS. Drone strike campaigns were about hitting terrorist targets without risking US soldiers. In practice they often killed civilians, stoked fear and resentment and *fed* extremist recruitment. Chile in 1973 was about stopping a socialist government from aligning with the USSR and keeping a market friendly system in place. The outcome was a military dictatorship that carried out torture, executions and extreme repression for years. US foreign policy fucing *sucks* historically, it's all focused on idiotic short term thinking and manipulation for financial gain, scaling that shit back can only be a good thing.

sweeetscience

Withdrawal from the US use of soft power globally. There are a lot of bad actors in the world, and some of the values enshrined in certain founding documents are important ideas that should be spread for the benefit of disadvantaged peoples around the world. We _could_ do a lot of objective good in the world if we wielded soft power in a way improved their lives in such a way that they believed in building community that represents the ideals that we care about. Instead we’ve abused our soft power position to enrich those that are already enriched and abused those that are the most vulnerable, both here and at home. Bernie wants to focus on the US, which is good, but he, IMO, completely ignores the role that the US has played - for better or worse - in the world since WWII. I don’t disagree with virtually any domestic policy of his, it’s the withdrawal of US global primacy that I have a serious issue with.

xanfiles

The world doesn't have enough compute. Current compute supply is only supply only meets about 0.0001% demand. Energy bottleneck is over-rated. When there is financial incentives or national importance, US removes all the roadblocks to make it happen (WWII or Warp Speed). Are there loser communities that mainstream media loves to highlight so that they can push their anti-AI agenda to gullible idiots? Of course. Reality is multiple firms are accelerating power supplies and there are state governments that are business friendly. Also, Thank God, Trump is in the Whitehouse, who can withhold funds for regions that are not AI-friendly and not Ron Klein (the pseudo-president from 2021-2025) who was mostly beholden to progressive anti-tech activists.

Intelligent_Way7240

Unfortunately it’s been like that since WWII

Royal_Carpet_1263

You’re right. This is a *multi asset* bubble easily twice the size of the subprime relative to the economy, with governments carrying (thanks to the pandemic) WWII levels of debt. How many ‘r’s’ in ‘remember’?

13jfncjai31

I mean, everything is valuable based on what we perceive it to be, that’s just what value is. It’s not a tangible, real thing that’s kind of the definition, but the value of some assets are tied to more “real” things than others. The USD is entirely fiat, it is backed by nothing but the vibes of the US as an entity, the US could print a gazillion dollars if it wanted to there’s nothing stopping it from doing that, but gold is inherently unprintable. Only so much exists, and its value comes from being a store of wealth. Bitcoin technically does the same but it’s historically acted basically like a more volatile equivalent of the stock market so although I think its worth it to have a little, I don’t think it’s on the same level as gold for serving the purpose as a hedge. As far as Japan goes, it is technically worse in total nominal % but its debt is structured differently so I don’t think it’s really comparable. Japan is a closed loop, 90% of the debt is insulated within itself, as well as the fact that Japan is the world’s biggest net creditor. Japan is like a very rich person who has a lot of credit card debt but they have so many assets as collateral that it’s not a huge deal. The USA is an open system, other countries own lots of its debt. It’s like a very rich person who is taking out bank loans to pay for the luxury cars and lavish vacations it can’t afford, as long as the banks think the US will pay it back they’re willing to let the charade continue but if anything bad happens and trust is lost things go bad very very quickly. The US debt is not productive since we won’t really get any returns from it like we did with our WWII debt, so unless we get infinite growth from AI( I find it unlikely but maybe), then we’re going to have problems real soon. Japan is also not the world reserve currency, the world financial system relies basically entirely on the USD remaining stable.

mauriciocap

If you search more historical documents you can call it the "1933 playbook" and include the fordism=nazism social control "investment" and WWII in the playbook. We already got Europe "in war", NATO rearming, etc The problem for oligarchs is **not** debt, is "too much hungry people with idle hands". As being productive increased these people bargaining power, war id the best option. Dumbing everybody down with AI had been a dream since before the 20th century, e.g. the movie Metropolis.

Skittler_On_The_Roof

You're entirely ignoring politics and context.  1946 we were paying for WWII.  It was essentially a non-recurring cost nobody had seen before. 2026 we continually run a deficit because our 2 major political parties switch between being unwilling to tax at sustainable (higher) levels or cut spending in meaningful (high) amounts. Neither side has a plan to reverse this trend, or even stop the bleed. Our debt is increasing faster than the 1.5% "fix" you propose.  

LurkerFailsLurking

Well no. Like I've been saying for months, but redditors like you and the parent comment seem to have a hard time with, is that for an analysis of market behavior to not be total crap, it has to include a coherent evaluation of the real world factors that the market behavior is just one small slice of. In particular, since the 1990s, we have lived in a unipolar world where there was exactly one global superpower that was the political, economic, and military center of the world. In his first Administration and then even more so in his first few month back in office, Trump has dramatically undermined the US' ability to remain the economic center of the world. While it's pretty clear for a while that American hegemony had never been sustainable and that the best they could manage was some kind of "controlled landing", Trump's erratic here-and-gone-and-here-again-maybe-then-maybe-gone-again trade wars that primarily targeted the US' own allies turned that controlled landing into a crash. We've seen the world moving away from the dollar as the international medium of settlement ([source](https://www.ebc.com/forex/what-countries-dropped-the-us-dollar-full-list-and-amp-reasons), [source](https://www.cnbc.com/2025/06/11/de-dollarization-in-asia-is-picking-up-speed.html), [source](https://www.jpmorgan.com/insights/global-research/currencies/de-dollarization), [source](https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2025/jul/16/trust-in-the-us-is-eroding-the-question-isnt-if-the-dollar-will-lose-supremacy-its-when)). We've seen US market growth outpaced by literally every other region for the first time in decades. We've seen major multilateral trade deals happening without US involvement for the first time in over a decade - like the first expansion of ASEAN in 15 years ([source](https://thediplomat.com/2025/10/asean-china-upgrade-free-trade-agreement/)). These aren't bumps in the road and they're not easily undone. These are massive shifts in the global economic landscape that will take years to complete but represents the start of an entirely new era for the world's economy. It's like comparing the US' role in the global economy before and after WWII, or before and after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Hugely important factors have changed.

Butter_Ball22

The genesis of fake internet shit coins was the MPC Series 481 paper notes used exclusively at US military bases post WWII LMAO🤌🤌🤌

seanpuppy

Post WWII Jobs, manufacturing, and domestic investment were aplenty. Foreign countries needed to buy shit from us cause all their factories got blown up. All the US workers bought shit because we were all making so much money. Inflation went up because money was flowing and people were spending. GDP growth from 1946 to \~1960 was around 5% per year. Right now the entire source of our whopping 1.8% GDP growth is tech companies passing around the same bag of money around to buy GPUs that generate AI tits and shitposts like this. Nowadays, the majority of people can barely afford chipotle without an installment plan. If AI keeps removing jobs, people will stop having money to spend. You know what GDP measures? How much money is spent

et_tu_bro

Great read, but the historical comparison misses a key detail. In 1946, foreign countries held less than 1% of US debt, so the government was effectively just taxing its own citizens via inflation to pay it off. Today, foreigners hold about 30% of that debt. If the US tries to inflate it away now, it becomes a direct tax on other sovereign nations. Since global investors have more alternatives today than they did post-WWII, this strategy would likely backfire and accelerate de-dollarization rather than quietly fixing the problem.

Illustrious_Serve507

We need to be prepared for a meltdown. If it happens, you should look to see if you can say something positive, like Harvard discovering a new physics that outdoes Newton, or anti-gravity, or something like that. Maybe you should ask Harvard physics if they have anything that could provide something positive to say if say things get bad. But trying to dilute the debt with low interest rates may not work, since central banks are already dumping U.S. Treasuries. $40T is a big number. You’d have to do a Star Wars–level change in physics to pay for that. Using Bitcoin as the primary monetary system would be dangerously negligent, and we were doing just fine until the tariffs came into play. Plus, if things do go south, people might start pulling the “Superman” move from tall buildings—only it’ll be a messy fall. But in the end, it’s just the wrong side of a gamble's greed that they chose to embrace. Now is the time to batten down the hatches and stock up on food and water. And make sure your batteries are still good since there are to many negative factors. Smart money would run and hide. You can always fight another day, if you have some capital. Might be able to buy a house with a couple ounces of gold but if it get real bad gold would just be a shinny rock that you cannot eat and you could pay an ounce for a loave of bread, if your children are starving. IF the US allows Israel too starve children, then what are we? And what do we deserve which is the reason that we would not allow these things to occur in the past (after WWII) since good Karma is a protection but now the US has cut USAID. Do you believe in Karma? The fiscal situation in the U.S. is so dire that a 60% drop in the Dow could potentially wipe out the country due to its massive debt and inflation. This could also trigger a global depression but the US could have done things in the 2000 when the debt was $5.6T. That money difference is in the pockets of the rich and now they are trying to do the same with bitcoin. As U.S. citizens, we need to take some decisive actions. First, we must implement measures to encourage healthier lifestyles in order to reduce healthcare costs. This could include setting health requirements, like maintaining a healthy weight and blood pressure, similar to a car warranty. If individuals don't comply, their premiums should increase, and no more drug and fast food advertisement on TV. Second, we need to tax the wealthy more to help address the growing debt. Third, significant cuts to defense spending are essential, at least a 50% reduction, and across the board, we should enforce a 15% cut in spending for all government programs and require a law to balance budget which to me is just plain conmen sense.

Big-Dragonfruit-2119

Like it or not government & international policies all intimately impact and sway the stock market. Look at any crash over the last 125 yrs. Loss of confidence which is often caused by political/world events can cause crashes or recessions. Just as confidence in world events/politics can encourage growth/gains. Look at the Panic of 1907, or the Hawley Smoot tariff worsening the Great Depression 1929. On the flip side there was post WWII growth, fueled by many government policies, including the creation of the GI bill and increased globalization due to removing GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs & Trade).

NewLeafBahr

NVIDIA alone illustrates the irrationality of current valuations, P/E above 65 and market value exceeding $3 trillion (more than the entire stock market of Germany, the worlds 4th largest economy). That's vibes trading fueled by AI hype. The Mag 7 are solid companies that won't pop exactly like the dot com nobodies did, but their correction when the euphoria fades *will* be significant. Real estate is more overvalued than 2008, in November 2025 home prices are approximately 50% above their long-term historical trend relative to income and rent (peak of 2008 bubble saw 35% above same trends, though subprime lending was the trigger that popped it and we don't see as much of that now). Residential real estate is only part of the story, commercial real estate is in freefall, office buildings across America sit 45% vacant due to shrinking workforce (through a mix or role-compression, jobs moved overseas, remote work, and now AI). These commercial office spaces were financed with mortgages when interest rates were 3%, now are coming due and need to be refinanced at 7-9%. Buildings aren't worth enough to support the new debt service at triple the interest, which means defaults, realized losses at the bank, and so forth. Bonds are supposed to be the safe asset you hold when stocks crash, and were even in 1929 and 2008. But now they're shaky because the US government has issued so much debt that the bond market can't absorb it anymore. Debt is approximately 125% of GDP, same ratio as at the end of WWII, but back then America was the only major economy not destroyed by war. Today the US is competing with countries with lower debt and stronger fundamentals. Annual interest on this debt exceeds $1.2 trillion per year and constitutes the single largest line item in the federal budget. When interest on debt gets this big, there's really only three choices. Cut spending drastically and cause a recession. Raise taxes drastically and cause a recession. Or print money to pay the debt and cause inflation. All three lead to crisis. That's what happens when the interest on your debt alone exceeds the GPD of Mexico.

klingma

Are you serious?  You pass bill then send out a check..that's literally all you need to do for UBI.  For Universal Healthcare you'll need to nationalize the current insurance industry, staff up the government claims processing team since Medicare would essentially expand to everyone, hire far more fraud investigators and actuaries to project future expenditures, create new policies that would affect a multitude of different age groups beyond just senior citizens, etc.  If you're seriously asking that question then you seriously haven't thought out switching to Universal Healthcare. There's a reason England did it post-WWII when they were literally rebuilding and not just on a random Tuesday in 2025 with an industry that makes up 9% of the country's GDP. 

Background_Drama6126

Wow! Someone who finally understands me! I lay a thousand kudos at your feet! 👍👍👍👍 Also, I'm wearing my surplus WWII Army Air Force flack jacket for all of the flack. 😁😁😁😁

Anxious-Writing-7909

My mother-in-law had little education. My father-in-law worked for the railroad his whole life after WWII. He had $ for a few shares of the railroad stock taken out of his pay, though he never made more than $30,000. When they had some extra money they bought stock in their local utility company and phone company. All the stocks paid good dividends, which they reinvested. They did this for decades. They had a small house paid for. He retired and died a couple of years later from cancer. When she was older, she came to live with us. Her three stocks were worth more than $1,000,000 and the dividends paid for her assisted living expenses eventually. All the remainder was passed down to her three children and and will eventually go to her grandchildren and great grandchildren. All from their hard work and dedication. She never heard of NVDA or quantum computing.

Nefarious_AI_Agent

Some if you weren't around for WWII and it shows.

Bobatronic

It would have been super smart to invest for the long term during the Great Depression, WWI, WWII. That was your point or question right? Absolutely!

PatientBaker7172

USA debt to GDP stands near 125%. Far below Japan 250% and Great Britain 300% WWII

mrpuma2u

Nah it was just after WWII in the 1950's. We bombed flat all the factories of 2 of our biggest competitors. After we helped Germany and Japan rebuild, they started kicking our butts. Thank you for coming to my drive-thru window TED talk.

MrYOLOMcSwagMeister

Also Japan still hasn't acknowledged or apologised for the horrific crimes they committed in China in the WWII period

Brawmethius

Yeah but the WWII debt lead us in to systemic inflation, destruction of sound money, and the critical role of government expenditure in economic stability. That level of spending set us on the path to where we are today.

Embarrassed-Care6130

German stocks were not wiped out *completely* by WWII, but they did drop by 90%. TBF if you were immortal (and didn't sell) you would have recovered eventually. (I think maybe even before 1970?)

RonMexico16

There were definitely waves of investment during rural electrification, post WWII, and suburbanization, but utilities invest close to $200 billion/yr into the grid. It’s weird to think that it’s tapered off. It’s literally the example of a “capital intensive industry” that comes up in business school.

bluen

In WWII, we wrote letters to each other, about insignificant things

bjran8888

I agree with your viewpoint, but not with your example. As a Chinese person, I have no objection to the United States using atomic bombs—in my view, it was a just act that saved more lives, including Japanese lives. In China alone, Japanese forces killed approximately 25 million people (over three-quarters of whom were civilians), while the combined deaths in Hiroshima and Nagasaki totaled only 250,000. It would take 100 nuclear bombings to match the number of people Japan killed in China (and I haven't even mentioned the other nations whose people were slaughtered by the Japanese military...). Indonesia saw 3 to 4 million killed, Vietnam 1 to 2 million, the Philippines 500,000 (including 100,000 deaths in the Manila Massacre), 500,000 in Korea, 250,000 to 1 million in Burma, 150,000 in Singapore, 150,000 Tamils in India, 100,000 in the United States, 83,000 in Malaysia, 40,000 in Australia, 50,000 in the United Kingdom, 20,000 to 30,000 in the Netherlands...） Employing every means to hasten the surrender of Japanese fascism served the interests of all humanity, including the Japanese themselves. (By the latter stages of WWII, Japan's mainland had virtually no males under 16, yet they still clung to the “100 million souls perishing together” doctrine.) In the Ryukyu Islands, the Japanese gave each Ryukyuan household a grenade, forcing everyone to pull the pin and commit suicide with it when American troops landed.

LiberalAspergers

International also beat rhe US for the 1950s and 1980s. Over the post WWII era works out pretty close to even.

BullSheetTrader

I too enjoy communism in the most capitalistic city in the world. You know - the kind we have only been fighting since WWII.

pizza5001

The single-most internationally uniting event since WWII.

FastAssSister

Not in any way did you give a fact. “Bonds are a good investment” is 100% opinion. In zero 20 year periods have bonds outperformed stocks. Not even just before the Great Depression, plus WWII, and onward. Nor will they ever without a massive worldwide calamity that renders money irrelevant. So no, they are not a “good investment.” They are ballast for a portfolio for people who can’t handle volatility, which is completely fine, but not if you want to optimize performance.

Astronaut-Proof

Wait, so you’re telling me people don’t want to pay $17 for a bowl of WWII-style rationed beans and rice with a hefty ounce of chicken? That can’t be right.

Proper_Look_7507

No disagreement there but that’s the original reason it shifted to Defense. In the post WWII they realized that national security would be an always on issue not just during conflict

kaushikfi6

I am no expert on china and I hope the phrasing in my question did not imply that - I just was trying to express a sentiment I was feeling for a while and seemed somehow substantiated by pockets of news I read now and then haha I actually don't read reddit very much for news related to china; I just think hearing about how LLM models are able to be run for cheaper in China and also hearing about how funding to American universities might be at stake has maybe been making me feel a general direction that the US might not be who it was after the WWII

Scientific_Socialist

The unions shot themselves in the foot. Ever since WWII they were more concerned with protecting the national economy, kicking out communists and selling out to the bosses rather than organizing more workers or militantly defending their interests. They became instruments for capital to control the workers, which is why workers left the unions en masse. Any new movement is gonna need new unions, bc the AFL-CIO is rotten to the core.

Atlas-Scrubbed

I think it largely happened due to WWII. Britain (and the pound) were weakened by WWI and WWII, and the US was the only major economy still functioning afterwards.

SeVenMadRaBBits

*Ahem* **Just a little info:** ***The President's Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) is located in a bunker beneath the East Wing*** of the White House in Washington, D.C. This secure underground facility serves as a command center and shelter for the President and other officials during national emergencies. Location: A bunker underneath the East Wing of the White House. Function: A secure shelter and communications center for the President and other protectees during a national emergency. Purpose: To provide a safe location for the President to work and lead the country in a crisis, such as a terrorist attack or other disaster. On a seperate note: **Many Nazis did flee to Argentina** and other South American countries after WWII, with Argentina receiving the largest number of escapees. **They were aided by established "ratlines" of escape routes, by sympathetic officials like Argentine President Juan Perón**, and the Vatican. While infamous Nazis like Adolf Eichmann and Josef Mengele found refuge there, the theory that Hitler also escaped to Argentina is not supported by evidence, and most historians conclude he died in his Berlin bunker. Tldr: ***Ballroom construction above East Wing and $40 Billion dollar payment to Argentina may have ulterior motives.***

SeVenMadRaBBits

*Ahem* **Just a little info:** ***The President's Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) is located in a bunker beneath the East Wing*** of the White House in Washington, D.C. This secure underground facility serves as a command center and shelter for the President and other officials during national emergencies. Location: A bunker underneath the East Wing of the White House. Function: A secure shelter and communications center for the President and other protectees during a national emergency. Purpose: To provide a safe location for the President to work and lead the country in a crisis, such as a terrorist attack or other disaster. On a seperate note: **Many Nazis did flee to Argentina** and other South American countries after WWII, with Argentina receiving the largest number of escapees. **They were aided by established "ratlines" of escape routes, by sympathetic officials like Argentine President Juan Perón**, and the Vatican. While infamous Nazis like Adolf Eichmann and Josef Mengele found refuge there, the theory that Hitler also escaped to Argentina is not supported by evidence, and most historians conclude he died in his Berlin bunker. Tldr: ***Ballroom construction above East Wing and $40 Billion dollar payment to Argentina may have ulterior motives.***

CertifiedGhoster

Influence of US comes from their post-WWII dominant position, a time where US was an industrial powerhouse and had the technology dominance over their opponents… its not the case today anymore particularly when you decided to outsource and erode your industrial powerhouse and you let your military-industrial complex scam you with expensive limited(in quantity) toys.

Beatless7

Let's cut off their electricity and aluminum. Let's close the borders to trucks and make them wait in cars for hours. Let's stand up to facism. I'm sure my dead relatives from the WWII would agree. Let's start a world boycott of the USA.

Remarkable_Run_5801

Ask it for empirical substantiations of WWII camp death tolls. The Germans kept meticulous records in WWII; down to the number of bullets fired, where people were moved, how they died. Why do the death counts not match? Why do the camp counts show that most are still alive until the moment the Sovet Army shows up? How did the Soviets correctly anticipate "6 million" before reaching all of the camps? Why did the Red Cross and the other Allied powers never find any death camps, but the Soviets did? The Soviets were notorious for using torture to extract false confessions. The Nazis who made confessions at Nuremberg regarding the camps later stated that they were confessing under torture and "duress." How effective is torture and other "enhanced interrogation" at producing legitimate information? ChatGPT will not give you any legitimate answers. In fact, it will warn you that it's unable to do so. It will presuppose a specific narrative; it **will dissect any claim that doesn't involve race, sex, gender, or WWII.**

SandMan3914

It's mostly a metaphor now, so don't take literally. But after WWII at lot of guard dogs were going to be put down because top brass didn't think they could be integrated, and many were but eventually a lot of soldiers were able to show they could be integrated back into society

Due_Lengthiness8014

Yes, demand for USD denominated debt (treasuries) are simply a byproduct of our reserve currency status. But it has more to do with USD being the main currency for international trade (after WWII) and simultaneously and quite intentionally running large trade deficits with the rest of the world. Other countries sell us goods and services, we net import more than we sell there by spewing dollars across the global financial system. These dollars are converted internally to their own fiat currencies within their own economies with some being "in reserve" for various purposes--more international trade, currency stabilization etc. Since these countries want to generate yield with their reserve dollars they almost immediately convert reserve dollars into U.S. treasuries there by generating interest these dollars flow back into the U.S. economy. This mechanism is pretty much the same for all countries the U.S. trades with not just Europe.

Ok-Amphibian3164

Let's hope lmfao. Maybe he can be useful for atleast one thing before they head undeground imto the emergency operations center. 😅😅 Fyi: for anyone who.doesnt know. They are demolishing the whole East wing now. The Bunker FDR built during WWII is under there. The ballroom is a distraction (imo)

AICHEngineer

WWII, US stock market was negative until it became pretty clear the tide had turned in the war in 1943 and the market started rising. Vietnam war contributed heavily to US inflation that sprung in the 1970s, one of the costliest wars that drove us to print more money until we got called on our bluff and had to go off the gold standard. The 1970s era of negative real returns in the stock market a result of numerous costly wastes of money and peace like vietnam, korea, etc. Iraq war lines up perfectly with the lost decade. Ukraine war didnt make stocks go up, it didnt help any stocks other than defense stocks. It contributed to global inflation. War helps industry, which is decent for the real economy, but its not bullish for stocks. It disrupts trade, reduces future cashflow expectations for companies that do international business, it drives isolationist rhetoric, it kills people who otherwise would contribute to the economy, it devastates potentially productive land, bad bad bad

ChollyWheels

\> iPhone 17 as it did with a 10 They're different products so your example is not a good one -- of course the prices are different \>  It’s a ridiculous oversimplification to say that dollars are basically just energy. So we just disagree. Sure in any particular situation you can point to a zillion reasons (shortages of raw materials, change in labor costs, tarifs) but the bottom line does not change. **The more energy per capita, the richer a society is, period. There is no substitute**. It is the underlying factor to all the others. If you disagree please identify an energy poor society that materially better off than an energy rich one. Some countries (most notably Japan) are not naturally resource rich, but they make up for it by acquiring it, so their energy per capita is high (and a lot more fairly distributed than in the US). But it's a perpetual problem for them, and explains a lot of their behavior leading to WWII.

Worshipme988

Americans haven’t updated their ideals about other cultures and still operating on the immediate post-WWII narratives regardless of the heaps of propaganda

JoGoBurn

How so? I mean he was put into a American concentration camp during WWII.

Loewenkompass

My logic is that investing in the reconstruction of a country after war, the profit margins are normally really high. Check out Germany after WWII. The difference between 1945 and 1955 could not be bigger. The country grew intensively. If I can get in this market right now, secured by guarantees, I‘m pretty sure it‘s a good investment.

CitizenLohaRune

Chatgpt is easy: There are three main categories to consider: 1. Freezing or seizing assets (e.g., central bank reserves, state-owned company funds, or oligarch assets). 2. Suspending aid or military assistance already promised. 3. Blocking trade payments or access to U.S. financial systems through sanctions. If we focus on frozen assets or withheld funds controlled by the U.S. government — not private trade restrictions — then there are roughly a few dozen major cases since 1917. Here’s a condensed historical outline: --- 🇩🇪 World War I (1917) U.S. used the Trading with the Enemy Act (TWEA) to seize German and Austro-Hungarian assets, valued at over $500 million (1917 dollars). Property was held by the Alien Property Custodian until after the war. --- 🇯🇵 and 🇩🇪 World War II (1941–45) Again under TWEA, U.S. froze Axis powers’ assets in the U.S. Later expanded to occupied countries. Japanese government and company assets in the U.S. were confiscated outright. --- 🇨🇳 People’s Republic of China (1949–1972) After Mao’s victory, the U.S. froze Chinese central bank assets and those of Chinese firms in the U.S. Released only after diplomatic normalization in the 1970s. --- 🇨🇺 Cuba (1960–present) Following the Cuban Revolution and nationalization of U.S. businesses, the U.S. froze all Cuban government assets in the U.S. (≈ $500 million at the time). Still in effect under the Cuban Assets Control Regulations. --- 🇮🇷 Iran (1979–present) During the hostage crisis, the U.S. froze $12 billion in Iranian assets. Some were returned under the 1981 Algiers Accords, but billions remain restricted. --- 🇮🇶 Iraq (1990–2003) After Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait, the U.S. froze about $1.3 billion in Iraqi assets. Portions were later used to compensate victims and rebuild post-2003. --- 🇷🇸 Yugoslavia/Serbia (1992–2000) During Balkan wars, U.S. froze Serbian and Montenegrin assets linked to the Milošević regime. --- 🇱🇾 Libya (1986–2011) Assets frozen over terrorism concerns (Lockerbie bombing). Later partially released after Gaddafi renounced WMDs. Re-frozen in 2011 during the civil war. --- 🇳🇰 North Korea (various since 1950s) Repeated freezing of assets and blocking of banking access, notably Banco Delta Asia (2005) and later Kim family and state trading company funds. --- 🇻🇪 Venezuela (2019–present) U.S. recognized Juan Guaidó instead of Nicolás Maduro and froze Venezuelan central bank and PDVSA oil revenues under U.S. control. --- 🇷🇺 Russia (2014–present, expanded 2022) After Crimea (2014) and full invasion of Ukraine (2022), U.S. and allies froze about $300 billion in Russian central-bank reserves. Largest asset freeze in modern history. --- Smaller or shorter examples Afghanistan (2021–present) – U.S. froze $7 billion of Afghan central bank reserves after Taliban takeover. Sudan, Syria, Myanmar, Belarus – targeted freezes and blocked assets during conflicts or human-rights crises. South Africa (apartheid era) – limited sanctions and loan restrictions, though not full asset seizure. --- Summary Table (approximate count) Century Distinct U.S. Actions Withholding Foreign Funds Examples 20th ~12 major cases WWI, WWII, China, Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Yugoslavia, etc. 21st ~8 major cases Afghanistan, Venezuela, Russia, North Korea, Myanmar, etc. So, roughly 20 times the U.S. has formally frozen or withheld another nation’s money in wartime or sanction contexts.

FreudianPaySlip

I do think gold to $6K is not far off. US decline as the hegemony of post WWII and Cold War is past its peak, Dalio has talked abt this for some time. Right now the world is finally waking up to it. As in all previous cycles of superpowers, the incumbent superpower’s currency will be devalued. The difference now is that the new superpower has a currency that’s being controlled by, leaving gold as one of the few alternatives left

BanditoBoom

Look….we can go back in time over and over and over until we are blue in the face…pointing out flaws here and flaws there and who’s great great great great ancestors are to blame for today’s issues. Or we can be adults, realize that the modern world is different…and at some point we have to draw the line in the sand and say “hey…from this point forward we are going to stop blaming the past and be accountable” For THIS discussion I think the point where we completely removed the gold standard is an okay place to start. I also think limiting our debate to things that happened during g the free trade era is another option. But to pull this “what-about-ism” back to WWII is absurd.

jrex035

Eh that's not really true at all. You can have a capitalist system with government regulations and interference, that describes literally every capitalist country that's ever existed. A truly "free" market doesn’t exist anywhere. The question is more of *how much* interference. Generally the US has been opposed to serious government interference outside of wartime conditions like WWI and WWII, until now. Under Trump our economy is increasingly looking like China's "command capitalism" than the way it looked 40 years ago

Bravadette

Jim KKKramer said "democracy won in WWII , democracy will win again." The planet is cooked.

Rando1ph

Honestly, I heard it somewhere a while back and didn't bother looking it up. It doesn't make a lot of sense because all they did in WWII was be a punching bag. But I was reasonably close, going off of memory. https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4075341-china-is-in-default-on-a-trillion-dollars-in-debt-to-us-bondholders-will-the-us-force-repayment/amp/

patrickbabyboyy

>Doesn't China still owe a ridiculous amount of reparations from WWII? Like more than they own in US treasuries. why would china owe anyone reparations for WWII?

Rando1ph

Doesn't China still owe a ridiculous amount of reparations from WWII? Like more than they own in US treasuries.

EMAN666666

So there won't be, first of all, because Palestine and Israel are the U.S.'s newest shiny toy after Afghanistan, Vietnam, Iraq, etc. Secondly, no one wants to sink money into a failing state with no spectacularly bright future. This isn't Japan post-WWII. Thirdly, I can't fathom why you'd take the significant risk with limited--if non-existent--guaranteed returns when SPY is right there.

Fair-Search-2324

Japan entered WWII because of American restrictions on oil, steel, and rubber that Japan needed.

adebyrne

It be interesting if Taiwan and TSMC decided to back the other horse. Why wouldn't they? Theyre only "American" because they weren't returned after WWII and they were subsidised. Now they are being told what to do. Isn't that why they didn't want the people's Republic?

MrNovember13

What? >Comparative advantage isn't a staple of economics, it is what trade relationships are based on Yeah... this is basic economics. Like freshman shit. I'm curious what you think economics entails. My current knowledge of China is current. They have two clunker carriers and one current generation carrier. The US has eleven supercarrier groups. While China has a larger navy by boat numbers, no country comes remotely close to the US in terms of global logistics and technological prowess. The notion spewed by the right that the US is somehow lagging in the global military sphere is laughable and just wrong. The US has a global monopoly on violence. Just because it's not wantonly employed, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There is not a single situation post WWII where the US has not imposed its will when it wants and where it wants to do so.

Qubed

Technically, this is/was the post WWII world order that was instituted as policy. It was based on forced integration into the world economy most controlled by the US and European countries.  Those leaders would created and the following generation that progressed it are dying off. That's why it is falling apart.

NoApartheidOnMars

The 2000 dotcom bust, the 1998 Asian crisis, the Savings & Loans scandal, the 1987 crash, the two oil shocks. Capitalism only functioned properly for about 30 years following WWII. After that, they started clawing back all those things that generation had obtained.

ETR_Reports

Comparing to real GDP fits in to the wage argument. We can compare wages to cost of living, and we can also compare wages to the overall productivity. Wages vs cost of living only measures living standards. Wages vs overall productivity measures what proportion of overall productivity labor is receiving. It indicates where the money is going (and answers the OP of this thread, "Where all this money coming from?") The answer is not from socks and pillow cases, but asset managers of the wealthy. Exactly as you mentioned, "if you want to reap the benefits of increased productivity, own the productivity instead of agreeing to a wage." Since the late 70s-early 80s, neoliberal economics has put us into a K-shaped economy, where the profits of productivity go to asset owners instead of labor as was the previous post-WWII norm. This has given us rising inequality and entrenched power within the top 1 and top 10% most wealthy. As wages have stagnated against cost of living, and steeply declined against productivity, it has become increasingly difficult for labor to afford to buy any assets. Every asset boom and bust cycle has proved as a crisis for labor and an opportunity for the asset holder. This feedback loop further increases the power of the asset holder, further suppresses wages, and worsens the ever growing levels of inequality.

Falcon3492

He said this the last time he was in office and his economy was I believe the 17th best of all time. FDR had the best economy of all time with a GDP of 10.1 % but he was president during WWII, Clinton and Obama's economies were much better than Trumps.

FinestCrusader

Japanese soldier continues to fight for 30 years after the end of WWII

Mr_Doubtful

You’re kind of proving my point. Nobody’s saying all dot-coms made money — obviously most didn’t — but a lot of tech companies during that era were extremely profitable: Microsoft, Intel, Cisco, Oracle, Dell, HP, IBM, etc. They were real businesses caught up in the same market mania. And your IBM comment doesn’t even make sense — being founded before WWII doesn’t exclude it from the dot-com era. Nvidia was founded in the ’90s, long before AI hype, but it’s still part of today’s “AI era.” Same logic. The point is: there were plenty of profitable companies during the bubble; profits didn’t stop valuations from going insane then, and they won’t necessarily stop it now either.

ChadInNameOnly

Exactly. Bro needs to zoom out. Even moreso, I'd argue gold has been going up for quite a while now due to the US evidently losing its grip on being the stable, lone global hegemon it's been since WWII. Trump's recent incompetencies have only accelerated the decline.

strip_club_dj

I'm not really versed in Japanese politics to say either way, Japan is a pretty conservative society. I don't know if rising nationalism there is a good thing or not but she is extremely hawkish on China and supports strengthening their military beyond merely a defense force which maybe what the region needs. She has made some controversial comments like downplaying Japanese war crimes and claiming the Japanese empire was fighting a war of defense prior and during WWII though.

milkplantation

The S&P has had a 25 year period where it was underwater (‘29-‘54) and post WWII it had two 7 year periods where it was underwater (‘73-‘80 and ‘00-‘07) as well as a 6 year period where it was underwater (‘07-‘13) Basically, if you bought the peak in August 2000, you would have had to wait 13 years until March 2013 to recover your money in any sustained manner. So 13 years, and that’s not inflation adjusted. So sure, the market always goes up. But consider your horizon. If you won’t need to access your money or are 15+ years from retirement, then by all means, set it and forget it. But if you are approaching retirement or need/want money for a large expense like a house, your child’s tuition, a car, whatever…Then make sure you can wait it out or consider some defensive positions. As long as the music is playing, keep dancing. But do so with the knowledge that extended slumps do occur. The average downtime after a bear market is 3 years and the median downtime is 2 years.

chris-rox

At least until the 1950s. Some people believe there really isn't even a middle-class, just people that had cash post WWII. Explains why most blacks still don't live as well as whites.

Reelpicker

At 25 the absolute best thing to do is stay the course and keep investing. When it goes down you’re buying it in sale. Also look back at how quickly the market recovered from seemingly catastrophic events. WWII, JFK assassination, 9/11, dot com bubble, housing bubble, pandemic…. If you were 65 sure, protect gains. But timing the market is a sure way to lose out on the best gains. I’m 50 and all I can say is I wish I’d invested more and more regularly at your age.

Reelpicker

At 25 the absolute best thing to do is stay the course and keep investing. When it goes down you’re buying it in sale. Also look back at how quickly the market recovered from seemingly catastrophic events. WWII, JFK assassination, 9/11, dot com bubble, housing bubble, pandemic…. If you were 65 sure, protect gains. But timing the market is a sure way to lose out on the best gains. I’m 50 and all I can say is I wish I’d invested more and more regularly at your age.

PtnbZ

Yeah. They took power after the WWII. De Gaulle gave them too much, and they kept spreading. Now you have to work in France to finance the boomers, because it’s the « contrat social ». Everything went to shit Because of them.

Pohmell

> the WWII

Sandvicheater

Whoever created Social security was kinda regarded, they were expecting infinite population growth to support the older workers not realizing there could be mass downward spike in youth population due to war, disease, emigration, etc. And even for the sake of argument there was guaranteed rise in population growth of youth eventually you're gonna run out of livable space in the country. To be fair it was created before WWII had it been considered after the WWII i think it would've been shot down.

Harley2280

>Post WWII their market went down 97% Yeah getting nuked is pretty bad for your economy.

Emotional-Power-7242

Japan had both of the two biggest stock market crashes that didn't involve communist revolutions. Post WWII their market went down 97% and during the 90's their market went down 43% then stagnated leading to a 34 year period before reaching previous peak. What's good is diversification.

Sir_PressedMemories

So, here in the US when scientists said "we have a vaccine and a simple mask will help prevent spread, and please wash your hands, it is a great way to prevent the spread" people said fuck that, the vaccines have 5g trackers in them, I am not wearing a mask you can't make me, and washing your hands makes you gay. People went out and bought masks made of mesh material, which are completely ineffective at anything. Those who could not work starved to death because the entirety of the government's help was a $1500 deposit. That was it. And not everyone got it. Well, there was a ton of loans sent out, but those were only for business owners and the already wealthy, which were then used to buy cars and boats and make home improvements instead of being used to pay employees, which is what it was created for. Oh, and then those loans were all forgiven, but forgiving student loans is communism. My country is a sick country. We are going to go to war. Stay away from us. Maybe in a generation or two, we will heal, but we are about to experience our own WWII-type regime change. Well, we are already experiencing it. Some folks are actively cheering it on.

Okayyyayyy

Except this has happened recently and WWII was almost a century ago

DrElkSnout

F is a wartime resource for production, just like during WWII. It's possible that the shit is about to hit the fan and the big boys know it.

Emotional-Power-7242

Emerging Markets got hammered in the post WWII period when Japan lost 97% of its market cap and China withdrew from markets entirely. In this case the risk of investing in less developed markets was realized. And this period is why emerging markets have underperformed over the last 120 or whatever years. Other than 1945-1949 they have actually outperformed over long periods. Of course right now we're in a 20+ year period of massive US large cap outperformance which makes everything else look terrible. It's up to you I suppose whether this is the new normal or there will eventually be a correction.

milkplantation

Economic shocks destabilize societies and give governments the nudge toward desperate policy decisions. Could look to the Smoot Hawley Tariffs deepening the global economic slump leading to bloc economies and empowering aggressive regimes which ultimately dovetailed into WWII. Could look to US freezing Japanese assets and cutting off oil supplies on Japan who was in the midst of an economic depression thus leading to Pearl Harbour. Germany’s hyper inflation before the Nazi party rise to power. For gold to have the run its had, there needs to be some concern beyond inflation such as global conflict.

ratpH1nk

Always? I think we will see something on the order of dot com bust but not as bad and also not as long for the recovery. US tax policy has got to change. |**Crash / Event**|**Peak Date**|**Trough Date**|**Decline (%)**|**Bear Market Duration (peak → trough)**|**Recovery Time (to regain prior high)**| |:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-| |**Great Depression**|Sep 1929|Jul 1932|−86%|\~34 months|25 years (to 1954)| |**1937–1938 Recession**|Mar 1937|Apr 1938|−60%|\~13 months|\~4 years (to 1942)| |**Post-WWII Crash**|May 1946|Jun 1949|−30%|\~37 months|\~6 years (to 1954)| |**1973–74 Oil Crisis / Stagflation**|Jan 1973|Oct 1974|−48%|\~21 months|\~7 years (to 1980)| |**1987 Crash (Black Monday)**|Aug 1987|Dec 1987|−36%|\~3 months|\~2 years (to 1989)| |**Dot-Com Bust**|Mar 2000|Oct 2002|−49%|\~31 months|\~7 years (to 2007)| |**Global Financial Crisis**|Oct 2007|Mar 2009|−57%|\~17 months|\~6 years (to 2013)| |**COVID Crash**|Feb 2020|Mar 2020|−34%|\~1 month|\~5 months (to Aug 2020)| |**2022 Inflation/Fed Tightening**|Jan 2022|Oct 2022|−27%|\~9 months|\~2 years (recovered by Jul 2023)|

theinvisiblecar

Careful on using that word conservatism, as argument could be made the opposite: The dark ages were a conservative maintenance of the feudal order of the time, with the rich estate/castle owners controlled all the wealth, and with peasants as workers either going with the land or granted small pittances, then along came disruptions to the conservative order of things: battle was fought and the people won rights (the magna carta), the black death/plague and wars dropped the population to near half creating labor shortages and increased wages for the little guys, creating more expendable income and launching Europe into the renaissance. Then with the discovery of three new continents poorer Europeans could immigrate elsewhere in order to have land and build their own fortunes. If one wants to continue this timeline into America: The year 1862 saw the passage of Abe Lincoln's Homestead Act, giving people up to 125 acres of land for free in the west, places like California, Arizona, Texas, if they would just move onto that land and work it for 5 years, (even immigrants fresh off the boat at Ellis Island took advantage this, and this law, this act, remained in effect through most of the 20^(th) century, and millions upon millions of people took advantage of it.) Lincoln did this to populate the west for strategic reasons, and we have this image of the west being made on rugged individualism and true grit, and maybe it took a good bit of grit to take advantage of the Homestead Act, but in a way it was also one a great big welfare giveaway, maybe the biggest welfare giveaway in all of history. (Give me a 125 acres in California or Texas and maybe I'll go live on it for the next five years right away, and do something with the land, at least grow some vegetables!) Then the disruption of the great depression leading into WWII, and with FDR's GI bill vast numbers of not-so-rich people, including even great numbers of the oppressed minority (black Americans,) earned good pay and had college degrees paid for, and out from all of this emerged the greatest middle-class society the world had ever seen, and with the U.S. GDP being greater than half of the entire world's GDP. Now for close to a half century we have seen a great erosion of the middle class, and the truth just may be that a two-tiered economy (with people increasingly either among the rich, or else among the poor, and with a vanishing middle,) just cannot size up to being as big and as healthy of an economy as one that has a big and strong middle class. Anyway, I consider myself to be a conservative, but it's good to be careful with words like conservative and liberal, as they can mean very different things in different contexts: The emergence of Europe from the dark ages was more a matter of liberal factors working against the long and conservative order of things, or like at the founding of the U.S. it was the liberals for independence and democracy, and it was the conservatives who wanted the colonies to remain under the rule of King George. In that sense I would hope that all patriotic American conservatives would consider themselves to be among the liberals, believing that America's independence from England and securing the rights of people as individuals, were good things.  

notapersonaltrainer

Let's quantify this: There are ~800,000 H-1B visa holders. These are not O-1 “extraordinary ability” visas, and it doesn’t block Indians from normal immigration. That’s about **0.22% of the U.S. population**, mostly low- to mid-level workers, who are apparently critical to post-WWII American tech dominance. Google has 7,649 H-1Bs, $371.4B in revenue, and $74.9B in free cash flow. Covering its H-1Bs would cost $765M per year—**0.21% of revenue** or **1.15% of free cash flow**—for what’s being framed as the lynchpin of its operation. The impact is larger for indian outsourcing mills like Cognizant, but I've never met anyone worried about protecting their margins.

notapersonaltrainer

To put numbers on this: There are ~800,000 H-1B visa holders. These are not O-1 “extraordinary ability” visas, and it doesn’t block Indians from normal immigration. That’s about **0.22% of the U.S. population**, mostly low- to mid-level workers, who are apparently critical to post-WWII American tech dominance. Google has 7,649 H-1Bs, $371.4B in revenue, and $74.9B in free cash flow. Covering its H-1Bs would cost $765M per year—**0.21% of revenue** or **1.15% of free cash flow**—for what’s being called the lynchpin of its operation. The impact is larger for indian outsourcing mills like Cognizant, but I've never met anyone worried about protecting their margins.

notapersonaltrainer

Just to size this dooming: There are ~800,000 H1B visa holders. These are not the extraordinary ability O-1 visas. This also doesn't ban indians from regular immigration. That's 0.22% of the US population of low-mid level workers you're claiming is responsible for post WWII American tech dominance. Google has 7,649 H1B's, $371.40 billion revenue, and $74.9 billion free cash flow. So It would cost $765 million/year, or 0.21% of revenue, or 1.15% of FCF, to preserve what you are claiming is the lynchpin for all their innovation. Now this would be a bigger deal for indian consultant mills like Cognizant, but I've never met anyone shedding tears for their profit margins.

notapersonaltrainer

There are ~800,000 H1B visa holders. These are not the extraordinary ability O-1 visas. This also doesn't ban indians from regular immigration. That's 0.22% of the US population of low-mid level workers you're claiming is responsible for post WWII American tech dominance.

merlin2181

There was a golden era because of WWII. The US was the only manufacturing giant left to make things.

ThatLooksRight

Yeah, and look what happened to them during WWII. 

destinationdadbod

Being optimistic here. Not trying to start any political arguments or anything. Just looking at the situation with some positivity and objectivity. I think the plan was to increase tariffs on foreign products to encourage companies to produce products domestically. Producing products domestically requires infrastructure which requires money from businesses to build the infrastructure. Making the cost of borrowing money would make it cheaper for a business to borrow money to build the infrastructure. Now more products could be made in America and we are less reliant on foreign countries for our goods. Now where do you get the workers? I think that is the optimistic goal of the immigration push. If the undocumented workers are not here then there are jobs in rural America for poor Americans to take. There is a push by secretary of labor right now to promote manufacturing jobs to Americans. To me it seems like they are trying to revive the pride in blue collar workers that existed in the 60s, 70s, and 80s. This all leads to a pre WWII mentality in America of being self sufficient and having less foreign involvement than we have today. Is this all working? 🤷🏻‍♂️ Again. This is me being optimistic and regurgitating things I’ve read, heard, seen, and kind of pondered on my commute.

ManifestWestward

Reddit let's the uneducated make shit posts like this, but the reality is the WWII generation was CONSERVATIVE. They would never be Antifa. In fact if they could see the world today, they'd turn around and fight WITH the Nazis and Japs.

AntoniaFauci

All sensible. I do believe, and have for many years, that organic rates will be lower than present. Rates are essential the price intersect of supply and demand. If we view generational wealth transfer and corporate profits as supply, and the demographics of where that flows as demand, that implies low price, i.e. very low rates. It’s not the post-WWII era. We aren’t building a nation of homes, or an interstate system, or sending our kids to college. The demand for borrowed money is now what it was, even as the supply of wealth is high.

CategoryAbject8977

Keyboard warrior? If I was drafted, I would go to war. If my child was drafted, they would go to war. My grandfather was a fighter pilot in WWII. I had three uncles who fought in Vietnam. I’m from a family of people who value what we have in America. i’m not some weak, unpatriotic clown whining about how prior generations fucked me over. I’m not some beta cuck like you.