miketheidiot
Lifer
- Sep 3, 2004
- 11,062
- 1
- 0
Originally posted by: yllus
Ah, I see. Posting more than one line of a sentence constructed by one's own hands is emulating me. Really, it's not as big a deal as you seem to think it is. Give it a try tomorrow and post something you've typed up yourself, even if it is just a rehash of another's thoughts. With the amount of energy you spend typing Bush this and Bush that, I'm sure you can travel your fingers away from Ctrl-C and Control-V for long enough to show us something "original".Originally posted by: BBond
I could emulate you...post nonsense from a dime store novel and pretend it's history.
But then, I understand why you do. You're enamored of a dime store president as well.
Keep defending the indefensible. Prostitute yourself for the lie. It's as close as you'll ever come to legitimacy.
Or how about this? Tell me where I've erred in what I've wrote regarding the Marshall Plan. Of course I mean I merely wrote it on this forum and not analyzed the figures from the days of the Plan - that was a little before my time. I point this out merely because you seem to have trouble with the idea that more than just the writers of history read the stuff and base their thoughts on it.
I will. A 5% bonus on top of GDP is signifiagnt for 2 reasons, 1) a signifigant amount of any economy is spent simply prividing for basic needs, such as food and water and clothes. 2) an equally signifigant amount will be spent on government ovhead and military. Just because the war ended doe ot mean the army disbanded, and it would have also consumed a signifigant portion of production.
For countries that have been obliterated by war, even a 5% bonus to GDP is signifigant since perhaps only 30% of GDP is being used to rebuild, if not less. I'm sure you would notice a substantial benefit if your personal income was raised from 30 thousand to 35 thouseand.