I bet if we just outsource our wars to china, we would pay a fraction for these wars and save taxpayers a shit load of money by just paying china to go and fight them for us. Lets say it costs the US 500 dollars a day per soldier to fight a war, we can probably fight the same war paying china 5 dollars a day per soldier. China makes money, we can work on our deficiet and still get to play policeman for the world. This would be good for the economy as less borrowing would end up a big positive over the next 40 years.
Nobody's stupid enough to go to war for worthless US dollar. Or US treasury paper that will never be repaid, either.
China don't trust the Dollar right now and actually seem to be looking to find something to do with it. Do you seriously think they're going to get tricked that easily? I don't think you give the Chinese government much credit.
I think your idea (though tounge-in-cheek) is brilliant ... and I wish the government had thought of it!
Especially when the Chinese can buy their way into a lot of these countries already, nowadays. US is seriously losing its influence in many ways, First, it's now seen as a debtor country that only issues IOU's while the Chinese have a fairly large kitty of US dollars (which they hope don't depreciate too fast) and momentum can carry a nation 10-20 years (both up & down). So, unless it's some resource-rich country that the Chinese can't bribe their way in, why would they be stupid enough to bother with a war?
No, this would not be good... China would probably win the wars quite quickly which would not be good for our Military Industrial Complex and Stock Market... We need long drawn out wars that are endless, unnecessary and useless but can be debated with passion from both the right and the left... I'd say everything is right on track for now... thanks.. :eek:
In many ways the world already has outsourced wars to us. That's a strong argument for keeping the US dollar as a reserve currency. The world finances the debt of the world's police (US), and in exchange, we get to consume eveyone else's products, and get cheap oil to boot. The benefit to everyone else is that they get cheap oil too and don't have to spend as much money on defense. Keep in mind, that China is in Iraq right now. We opened the door for them, and they buy our debts. I'm not saying this will last forever, but that seems to be the current/recent status quo/quid pro quo. It is tenuous, however. Edgehunter brings up a good point. I'll add this: China is so overpopulated that a major war would actually be beneficial to them. People in China prefer having boys to girls - and right now, there is a huge lopsided ratio of men to women. All those young men can be detrimental to society. Expect them in the near future to be in resource wars. As sick as this sounds - China would would benefit by getting resources AND eliminating the male/female disparity.
Wrong. US wars are some of the most economically-stimulative endeavors that our domestic economy can experience. Think about it. If you build a car worth $20,000 and it is driven for 20 years and then crushed for scrap and salvage, that's not that stimulative. On the other hand, if you build a $20,000 missile and blow it up within 2 months of it's manufacture date, you'll need another $20,000 missile ASAP (not 20 years later) and the missile has no salvage value. Building on that premise, if you shoot a $20,000 missile at a car that has been depreciated for 10 years (let's say a hypothetical beginning value of $20000 [based off a 20 year, straight line depreciation method with a $2000 salvage value] so car is worth $11K at year 10), the car and missile now don't have any salvage values at all, and you've just destroyed $31K worth of capital that has to be replaced because it just disappeared. A Syrian cab driver then sells his 5 year old toyota to the family of the Iraqi man who was blown to bits along with his car. The Syrian buys a one year old, gently used toyota taxi from UAE, and the UAE cab driver's company sends an order to toyota for a new cab. America produces another $20,000 missile, and employs the workers at the missile factory. All the while, the pilot that fired the missile gets paid roughly $55K/yr. tax free (while in a combat zone) and is employed and off of unemployment benefits. This pilot is insured under the military, and stands to receive roughly $400K in benefits if he dies in combat. The military demographic is made up predominantly of middle class and lower class men an women (just a fact). The families of these men and women have higher MPC's relative to savings rates (marginal propensities to consume) because the mid and lower income bracketed people have to spend more of their paychecks to pay for living than richer people. If a service member is killed in combat, there will be $400K worth of benefit that starts to enter the economy at a higher rate, relative to savings that if it were a person higher on the economic totem pole. Everything being said, war is very stimulative. If you want to know by how much, do some math that includes aggregating: Replacement values of all destoyed properties/objects/munitions/ordinace that intend on being replaced by US or those on the receiving end of things Tax free wages earned by all US service members and military contractors Wages earned by employees of companies who produce military and military support goods Revenues of companies who produce military and military support goods "DEATH STIMULUS" of roughly $2.1 billion since 2003 (servicemember life insurance amount x # of service member deaths) Add it all up, and ask yourself..."Can we really afford to farm out our wars?" Then thik about how screwed our economy would be right now if we weren't engaged in a multiple-front war. War is the greatest business of all time and the sooner you realize that, the sooner you'll achieve enlightenment.