Who needs war? Japan says earthquake will actually INCREASE gdp.

On the BIGGEST FAULTLINE ON THE PLANET....in THE RING OF FIRE.
Brilliant.



Last Edited by Useless Cookie Eater on 03/12/2011 08:38 PM

It's endemic.

Remember Israel's Binyamin Netanyahu's immediate reaction to events on the morning of 9/11 was "it's very good." He corrected himself... saying it wasn't good, but would generate sympathy for Israel and its problems with terror...

Psychopaths is correct. Out of touch with reality is another phrase that comes to mind.

Yep - it so easy in a fiat system to increase gdp.

All I know is that it will take decades to rebuild. Most of their building was done when they had a stronger economy. It took a lot of money and time to build the earthquake proof towers and infrastructure. they don't have the money now.

I read the other day that China builds buildings... then destroys them, so that they can keep building and add on to economic growth.

How fucking retarded is that?

It was fucking inevitable.

One tiny problem. They have a MASSIVE debt. So all the influx of jobs and money will only remove some of their debt. If they did not have the debt, then this would be true. But they have a massive deficit to address first.

Haven't read the entire thread. However, in response to the subject, BULLSHIT. Only an economic dumbfuck would believe this crap.

less people. you answered your own question

It is called a housing/construction bubble. Doesn't mean JACK! We did the same in some ways... we got all sorts of people to build and remodel homes. What do you think a remodel is if not the removal of a perfectly good home and "upgrade" it.

Same crapola and yes, China has a massive housing bubble running.

Yep. Certainly didn't help New Orleans. Sure, some people made money, some got ahead. But overall, the city is still struggling, corruption is rampant and it is still a mess.

The broken window fallacy was first expressed by the great French economist, Frederic Bastiat. Bastiat used the parable of a broken window to point out why destruction doesn't benefit the economy.

In Bastiat's tale, a man's son breaks a pane of glass, meaning the man will have to pay to replace it. The onlookers consider the situation and decide that the boy has actually done the community a service because his father will have to pay the glazier (window repair man) to replace the broken pane. The glazier will then presumably spend the extra money on something else, jump-starting the local economy. (For related reading, see Economics Basics.)

The onlookers come to believe that breaking windows stimulates the economy, but Bastiat points out that further analysis exposes the fallacy. By breaking the window, the man's son has reduced his father's disposable income, meaning his father will not be able purchase new shoes or some other luxury good. Thus, the broken window might help the glazier, but at the same time, it robs other industries and reduces the amount being spent on other goods. Moreover, replacing something that has already been purchased is a maintenance cost, rather than a purchase of truly new goods, and maintenance doesn't stimulate production. In short, Bastiat suggests that destruction - and its costs - don't pay in an economic sense.

The broken window fallacy is often used to discredit the idea that going to war stimulates a country's economy. As with the broken window, war causes resources and capital to be funneled out of industries that produce goods to industries that destroy things, leading to even more costs. According to this line of reasoning, the rebuilding that occurs after war is primarily maintenance costs, meaning that countries would be much better off not fighting at all.

The broken window fallacy also demonstrates the faulty conclusions of the onlookers; by only taking into consideration the man with the broken window and the glazier who must replace it, the crowd forgets about the missing third party (such as the shoe maker). In this sense, the fallacy comes from making a decision by looking only at the parties directly involved in the short term, rather than looking at all parties (directly and indirectly) involved in the short and long term.

[link to www.investopedia.com]

.


The official doesn't understand what's going to unfold in
the days and weeks ahead as their Food Shelves continue to drop.


Here's a short list of obstacles they face:


Contaminated Coastal Farmland made useless
because of the Salt Water from the Tsunamis ...

Contaminated Ground Water made useless
because of the Nuclear Radiation run-off ...

Contaminated Salt Water (Desalination) made useless
because of the Nuclear Radiation steam clouds ...

Contaminated Seafood & Seaweed made useless
because of the Nuclear Radiation steam clouds ...


Throw in:

-- loss of Electricity
-- unusable Ports and Roads
-- removing Tsunami Debris
-- demolishing unsafe Buildings
-- poor Sanitary conditions due to Broken Sewage Lines
-- etc, etc, etc.

.

Let's also add MASSIVE shock to the equation. Who the hell is going to be functioning well and working to PRODUCE anything?! The grief, the trauma, the sadness, the shock will weigh on those affected for a very long time.

And all of that holds true even without Nuclear Radiation run-off so add that in and you have a destroyed country for a while.

US market correction for this week?

Japan could dump treasuries to pay for rebuilding costs from the tsunami
[link to www.examiner.com]

Plus they will take all of the victims money and property.