The Marshall Plan - 70 years old. Should the US do similar to itself?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by blackfox, Jun 5, 2017.

  1. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #1
    The Marshall Plan turns 70 this week. We gave a war-tattered europe between 13-18 Billion dollars in aid (130-190 Billion in todays dollars) to revitalize their economies - and it worked rather well (with a few exceptions). Should the US invest similar money on itself these days? The 13 Billion we gave was on a GDP of roughly 260 Billion. Our GDP today is 18.5 trillion. Yes, we're in debt - but money well-spent? Thoughts?

    (PS realize highly unlikely to happen)
     
  2. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #2
    yes, it's THEIR turn to give us the money :D
     
  3. blackfox thread starter macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #3
    Knew this reply would happen. Also knew it had a high probability of coming from you...;)
     
  4. DrewDaHilp1 macrumors 6502a

    DrewDaHilp1

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    All Your Memes Are Belong to US
    #4
    We had TARP and whatever that "shovel ready jobs" program Obama used to pay his friends back.
     
  5. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #5
    we happen to need the help, we did it so it's their turn :D
     
  6. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #6
    We can start by building a wall. ;)
     
  7. darksithpro macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2016
    #7
    I'm beginning to think this is why there's such a huge push for Globalism. The Europeans probably view the rise of Nazi Germany, WW2, white nationalism and the genocide committed by Hitler was caused by "Nationalism" Thus the old Europe doesn't work anymore and to prevent another world war all countries should be economically and politically intertwined, so another war will never happen again and there will be world peace...
     
  8. ibookg409 Suspended

    ibookg409

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2016
    Location:
    Portsmouth, NH
    #8
    That's call in that loan with 70 years of unpaid interest. Or how about those European governments invest in US?
     
  9. blackfox thread starter macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #9
    Wow. so far this thread has gone to unexpected places...so let me rephrase the question: Should a bunch of money be spent investing in the US as a Country? Infrastructure, Economy etc?
     
  10. juanm, Jun 5, 2017
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2017

    juanm macrumors 65816

    juanm

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Location:
    Fury 161
    #10
    Your CEO is untrustworthy. He walks out on signed deals, doesn't respect other CEOs, has a history of not paying contractors and bankruptcy...
     
  11. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #11
    Yes, provided it is directed in such a way as to hep the average person and not wind up concentrated in the hands of the top 0.1%, as most of the economic gains during the recovery have.
     
  12. blackfox thread starter macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #12
    Well, oddly enough (different era, I know) the Marshall plan both: (a) streamlined regulations, and (b) required increased Unionization. So - there's something for everyone to love ;) Part of the reason I made this thread (other than the upcoming anniversary of the MP), is that the problems in the US are so systemic that imo - only a massive Government intervention can correct things, however imperfectly. I'm no Economist, but I do know that the only way to increase the GNP meaningfully is to give buying-power to the maximum amount of people (i.e. economic security) - not the top percentile.
     
  13. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #13
    I wouldn't describe US infrastructure or factory stock as being "War ravaged." And certainly nothing even vaguely comparable to the state of Europe at the end of WWII. Our economy certainly isn't moribund in any meaningful sense of the word.

    So: Big picture, probably not.

    That said, the US does need to spend a considerable sum to upgrade much of our infrastructure to 21st century standards. Many of our bridges need repair. Many of our airports are a disgrace. We could stand to make improvements to our power grid. And many of our state and national highways are in a sorry state of repair.

    Yes: We're in debt. But interest rates are at historic lows. Borrowing money cheaply now will pay off handsomely in terms of increased productivity and decreased maintenance and operating costs.

    If Donald Trump announced a $3 - $5 trillion Infrastructure program, paid for by Govt. Backed Bonds, he'd find a great deal of support for it from both labor and business, as well as much of the population.

    But I'm not going to hold out much hope that's going to happen. Trump's "infrastructure" plan seems to mainly consist of giving tax breaks to real estate developers.
     
  14. mrkramer macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #14
    Our infrastructure at home isn't bad enough that we need foreign countries helping us out yet. If you mean do we need to continue to invest in our infrastructure, yes we do.

    As for the marshal plan we should do something similar to build up the economy's of Latin America so that people don't feel the need to flee from there in search of more jobs and safety.
     
  15. niploteksi macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2016
    #15
    Yes, you're short a couple of years of carpet bombing. But never fear, when Trump is gone and you're standing on a pile of rubble, we'll help you out. At least a third of you. The other two thirds are going to refuse help and instigate their own programs.
     
  16. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #16
    I think to compare the state of the US infrastructure currently to that of post WW2 Europe, is a little bit childish to say the least.
     
  17. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #17
    The problem in th US isn't that there is to little money to spend, but that most of it ends in a tarpit only ever needing more money.
     
  18. flyinmac macrumors 68030

    flyinmac

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Location:
    United States
    #18
    Part of the problem with the idea that I see, is that you cannot give yourself more money than you have, without it coming from an outside source.

    So, for example: if I'm broke, don't have a dime, and I'm homeless... I can't just say I'm going to give myself $5,000 to get back on my feet.

    I'm going to have to get that $5,000 from an outside source. I can't just reach into my own pockets and say I'm going to spend more to improve my situation.

    So, in the proposed example of this discussion, the only way to do what is proposed is to either borrow more money, or increase taxes, or ask for a gift (which nobody will give).

    Borrowing more money is what we're already doing. Increasing taxes doesn't help the poor. And as stated, nobody is giving away money.

    Now, if we wanted to try to get things back on track, we could propose a worldwide debt settlement.

    Everyone pays off their debts. So... without going into all the technicalities of real debtors and who really owes who, I'll just illustrate by fictitious example:

    China pays Russia, and the United States, and Japan

    Iran pays the United States and Afghanistan.

    Europe pays Japan, and the United States

    Japan pays Russia

    Iraq pays Russia and the United States

    And so on down the line until every nation has repaid every debt they owe by passing the money back and forth until everyone has settled their debts on the balance sheet. Including the United States, who would settle their international debts by using the money repaid by other countries.

    It'd take a lot of Math and balance sheet comparisons to settle it all up and identify where all the money needs to go.

    But, in reality, a simpler method would be to just figure it out on paper and then only move money once all cross debts were removed from the equation.

    The reality is that right now everybody owes everybody. So, a lot of debts could likely be crossed off the sheets.

    To give a simpler illustration:

    If you owe me $10. And I owe you $5 and I owe your sister $5. Then it would be simpler to just have you give your sister $5 and we call it all settled.
     
  19. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #19
    Do you know what the net financial position of the United States is?

    (That is the total worth of all the assets owned by US citizens, corporations, State, local, and Federal Government, etc. - minus their accumulated liabilities, debts, etc.)

    More than $120 TRILLION

    I remember having lunch at a lakeside restaurant in an affluent suburb of Minneapolis a couple of years ago. I'd seen a Ferrari California; a couple of S-Class Mercedes, and more Porsches than I could count in the parking lot. Speedboats and cabin cruisers bobbed at the piers. Dappled sunlight reflected from a thousand panes of glass from the mansions dotting the far shore.

    And the people I was dining with spent most of the first two courses telling me that the country was broke.
     
  20. cfedu macrumors 65816

    cfedu

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto
    #20

    As long as it is spent properly, I see no reason why not, but it would most likely be used on bridges to nowhere and other bogus social programs.
     
  21. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #21
    Only if you equate the state with it's citizen.

    Sure some debt is owned by other states, but in the end most will be in private hands (through banks or pensions funds).
     

Share This Page