This one is for Detroit and all those who lost their Childrens homes to Communist EW.

This one is for Detroit and all those who lost their Childrens homes to Communist EW.
This is an unprofessional Collection cite. That wishes for Speech and Debate with Regards to the topics collected and Special Libraried. I wish for defense of Fair Use Doctrine, not for profit, educational collection. "The new order was tailored to a genius who proposed to constrain the contending forces, both domestic and foreign, by manipulating their antagonisms" "As a professor, I tended to think of history as run by impersonal forces. But when you see it in practice, you see the difference personalities make." Therefore, "Whenever peace-concieved as the avoidance of war-has been the primary objective of a power or a group of powers, the international system has been at the mercy of the most ruthless member" Henry Kissinger The World market crashed. There was complete blame from the worlds most ruthless power on the world's most protective and meditational power. So I responded. Currently being edited. If you have any problem with IP or copyright laws that you feel are in violation of the research clause that allows me to cite them as per clicking on them. Then please email me at US Copy Right Office Fair Use doctrine. Special Libary community common law, and Speech and Debate Congressional research civilian assistant. All legal defenses to copy right infringement.

Monday, November 1, 2010

Impacts of Why Soviet Union Collapsed.

Russia was once a military economy much like the US. and the US was much a production economy like China. However, now the tables have turned. As current account balances show being a military war economy is not beneficial for the macro economics of a country. "Indeed, with hindsight, we can see that the period of 1880-1929 was one in which the United States, with much lower per capital military spending, was able to overtake and surpass the European powers in technology and industrial production." However that is completely inverted now.

I would predict that while the US was going for innovation and technology that could be used in the private sector for business. Russia was building up heavy metal. As such the US was more of an espionage watch economy were Russia was more of an heavy metal economy. That is a hypothesis. However, I would see the invert of that today. As the Communist countries are now more into espionage and high technology for the business sector, along with massive amounts of economic warfare to create new trading partners. Were as the US is taking on a war on terror on its own pocket book. Which has kept intelligence labor, economic labor, and political and citizenry clout focused on the war against terror.

Only recently have we seen Russia and the US work together on a raid against drugs. However, other free countries have been helping out but the US has been mainly flipping the bill even though our account balances are dead last and our GDP and GNP growth rates are below poverty growth at around 2% which is unsustainable.

One of the reasons why Russia went under was its inability to create liquid able assets for commerce. We saw this as they were in need of funding they sold the only products they had which were military. At this time we can see a similar impact on the US. Were the US's is based primarily on a war and service industry market place. Which as our account balances show if we do not gain funding from the Communist to keep our dollars high and reliance on war and service set. The US would have to go back to doing the same thing they did during the cold war and the same thing that the Communist are doing now. Which is helping build economies by selling them machinery and products, while also developing new technologies to create a better world.

There are multiple factors that play into the Soviet Crash that are similar to what the US is going through.
1. High war spending and borrowing on a war that was not win able by either side (cold war) then a costly war that was so entrenched that it was becoming a money pit (Afghanistan).
2. The Soviets due to high military war economics lost heavy political clout in the international economy as the US who was based more on production was able to make ties to possible cut funding and borrowing which the Soviets were so in need of in the international community by showing that it was simply a matter of time before they could not make their payments on their account balances and they will have to bow to the US's will as the US's market and account balances were stronger than the Soviets.

We can see similar affects happening between China and the US. However, the tides have turned. China is using old Cold War theories of friendly invasion to build economic reliance and political clout. While the US is spending trillions of dollars on a specific part of the world which is not reaping the benefit except for the benefit of that part of the world which is not pitching in at an equal level for security. Thus the US is at a constant loss for economics and friendly invasion tactics. While the Chinese have been able to replicate the US strategy against the Soviets and replay it in the Communist's favor.

My suggestion is to start having other countries pitch in at a vis a vis level. As the US is not taking home and reaping benefits like China is in Africa with their friendly invasions. This is mainly due because war economies are based on inflation. As no one pays for the war unless we medieval take booty. Which civilized worlds not longer do. This then also adds onto economic hardships as the US saving levels have declined heavily over the years due to an inability to pay its debts, welfare, and create jobs for its citizens. The problem them becomes even in my heart the Patriot v. the number cruncher. However, as the old Cold war guard new. This is a game of numbers. Thus we need to buckaroo bonzi, and start having equal chip in for the war against terrorists. This then will have to be allowed with more precise active role in actuating the ability to turn from a war service economy to a profitable friendly invasion economy. In which the US goes back to its tactics of helping build countries which then inturn create domestic currency and debt reserves which allow for more savings and less inflation, which thus lowers the taxes.

The security part of it needs to be taken over by the UN and NATO. As they are already trying to take jobs in the US base closures in which they should be spending their money and time out of our country and fighting were the war is. This will allow the US to keep its military divisional sovereignty while allowing NATO to devote more resources to pitch in fighting the war on terror instead of wishing to recieve more ground on US soil.

Rider i
Account balances, red death, loss of political clout, loss of sales to developing market places, huge massive spending on troops and non technological advancements, a necessary need for the world to fund the war on terror and not the US. It makes no monetary sense for the US to lead the war. As countries that are not even pitching in like China are gaining huge resource contracts in the areas we are securing. Which could be being done by NATO forces or UN forces or Joint forces at an equally level of funding. Not trillion dollar inflated economy in which we gain little back in return except for I agree secure national objectives.

No comments:

Post a Comment