US Economic Expansion Through Nuclear Detonation – Let’s Do It

21
458


If things have been quiet on AT recently, it’s because our world-class economics think tank has been considering creative ways of boosting the nation’s GDP. As scholars of modern finance texts will be aware, whilst debt is wealth, the marginal increase in GDP resulting from an extra dollar of debt created tends to diminish over time. Simply put, paradoxical as it might sound, economic growth tends to slow as the debt burden increases. We’re not suggesting for a moment slowing down monetary expansion; rather, we are looking for other ways of increasing our nation’s wealth.

We’re pretty sure we’ve found the answer: nuking Los Angeles followed by New York City. Why would we do such a thing? Well, because disasters always create economic growth. Don’t take it just from us: accredited economists and bankers have been saying it for some time.

According to the highly accredited William Dudley of the New York Fed, Hurricane’s Irma and Harvey will prove beneficial to the US economy.  This is because, he says, “the long-run effect of these disasters is it actually lifts economic activity because you have to rebuild all the things that have been damaged by the storms.” Dudley’s analysis reminds us of the even-more accredited economist, Nobel prize winner Paul Krugman, who, in the aftermath of 9/11 said that Saddam Hussein’s actions ‘could even do some economic good’

Irma, Harvey and Hussein all did tremendous damage in the short run if we think about the destruction of whole neighbourhoods, buildings, infrastructure etc. As the rebuilding work takes place, however, demand for builders, carpenters, service providers etc. is boosted. For this reason, say Krugman and Dudley, the economy gets a much needed perk-up.

Since we see literally no holes whatsoever in Krugman and Dudley’s analysis, it is clearly time to create an even greater disaster so as to allow for much more economic stimulus. What could be better then than detonating several nuclear devices in the centres of Los Angeles and New York City as a one-in-a-kind experiment?We don’t suggest destroying both cities while the populations are in place. Rather, we suggest the people be removed to the safety of FEMA camps on a temporary basis. Once the cities have been reduced to radioactive dust, the clean-up and rebuilding operations will need to commence in earnest. Rebuilding mass centres of population will take a lot of time and money because, as Dudley would say ‘you have to rebuild all the things that have been damaged by the [nuclear bombs]

Just because no-one has been bold enough to undertake the above in the past is not reason not to do so now. Let’s roll.

Black Lives Matter

#NukeRussiaNow

MillionDollarBonus

The only problem BLM, is that if Pbier’s analysis is correct, Russia may in fact benefit from a nuclear strike. Maybe we need to think of a different method of attack.

Black Lives Matter

You’re right. Make Trump the President of Russia so he can “Make Russia Great Again.”

MillionDollarBonus

Good suggestion. Or we could send the alt right there to advocate for border controls which will keep out all the hardworking Muslim refugees who do the jobs that Russians just aren’t willing to do.

trav777

…and won’t pay their pensions either! Win/win.

Nuking cities would work simply because “we all know” that WW2 ended the Great Depression.

Expat Logger
Expat Logger

#NukeRussiaLater and be done with it…

MillionDollarBonus

I’m personally relying on undocumented Americans and Muslim refugees from Iraq and war-torn Syria to pay my pension. I’m not saving a penny myself.

Shitty
Shitty

this will cause huge global flooding. you wanna drown all your nostrilled bros?

MillionDollarBonus

Many may consider this proposal somewhat controversial, but in reality most accredited economists agree that World War II ended the great depression, and have suggested that another major war could boost our GDP significantly by boosting government spending. Is it really a coincidence that there was an economic boom in the early to mid 2000’s during the most aggressive stages of the war on terror?

If indiscriminate spending on rebuilding infrastructure induces economic growth, then I don’t think it’s at all controversial to suggest that a nuclear strike in New York City could stimulate a lot of economic growth.

trav777

If NYC and LA get nuked, infrastructure spending is the LAST THING we should be devoting money to. The Defense Department, military, and the intelligence agencies to “prevent another attack” from happening. They can increase their surveillance of US Citizens to make sure that “lone wolves” don’t cause more mayhem.

MillionDollarBonus

Wow that’s a great suggestion. It doesn’t really matter what we spend money on, it’s just the quantity of spending that matters, when it comes to economic growth. So we might as well spend it on something useful like beefing up surveillance. We need mass surveillance of our population because anybody could be a terrorist, but we shouldn’t have ANY immigration control from countries with high rates of terrorism because that’s racist.

jfb

I’m not sure to understand the first paragraph; perhaps Maurice Miner could enlight me with a simplistic reformulation?

Vladmir Putin
Vladmir Putin

Eat some prion infected steak, that will help you make sense of this article.

Black Lives Matter

So many victims of police brutality . . .

Black Lives Matter

You seriously live in a fantasy world. Racial profiling is to blame.

hungrypirana
hungrypirana

This idea is more than 3 years old. Obama gave Iran $1.7 billion for nukes and proxy wars. When Pbier wants $10,000, the Feds need his paperwork. When Iran needs $1.7 billion, progressive a-holes send cargo planes.

Black Lives Matter

Breitbart “News” is fake news. Why don’t you cite something real, like CNN?

Make my votes count
Make my votes count

While a nuclear war or other disaster are a nice stimulant I truly believe that our real solution to solving poverty and have a great GDP is close at hand.
We have been too dependent on the FED to try and print enough money and frankly they are not able to keep up with the demand.
Most households now have a personal computer with a color printer. Is there a reason why we can’t lift the stupid counterfeiting laws and make it legal for everyone to print the money they need to get by. A simple link to various currency amounts would allow a high quality paper currency to be produced.
Forget universal basic incomes or limiting minimum wages. This is the solution to our economic problems.

wpDiscuz