War has been prevalent among nations throughout most of history, a time when increased food, weapons, uniforms and other supplies become neccessary to support soldiers. Therefore, during war time there is increased government spending and often a change in what is produced in order to fulfill these needs. Especially during wars in which a nation is supporting not only itself, but also weaker fighting nations, these demands are incredibly high. Because these demands become so high there is usually a shift in what is being produced, switching to war producing industries instead of consumer goods. Although wars are expensive and often painful, they spark the economy in an interesting way that no other event has ever been able to. Because of this spark, post-war industry is usually at the highest point that a nation sees, with the least unemployment and the greatest amount of consumer spending. However, within the game this change is often not evident, and although the expenses of war take their toll, the post-war economic spark does not seem to be evident.
According to Heilbroner, during World War II "camme a tremendous forced expansion in governent outlays." Prior to this time government intervention in the economy and spending had been limited but this forced the government to increase spending in order to obtain the proper amount of weapons, supplies and food. By 1944 the government had spent over $100 billion, realizing that as long as production grew then a great federal deficit could be manageable. This great spending helped to lift America out of it's economic depression, ending a great amount of the previous unemployment and allowing the economy to revive because of the great amount of money that was now being put into it. Without WWII the depression could have lasted much longer. Even after the war ended unemployment was not as high as expected and the economy did not collapse to the pre-war depression.
However, within the game Civilization IV, war never seems to help an economy but only to hurt it unless another nation is acquired, along with all of it's resources and factories. War, just as in real life, is very expensive and takes an economic toll on the nation but does not seem to do anything to spark the economy. Ultimately, in the game the spending of war only goes to hurt the civilians of a nation instead of helping them, leading only to suffering and poverty but never to prosperity. This is obviously inaccurate, at least historically, and is a part of the game that could possibly be altered to create a more realistic situation.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Wow. Believe it or not, I just wrote a blog on that some concept. After I wrote it, I was looking for someone who had a good blog. Amazingly, I found someone who thought the same thing I did. I absolutely agree that war is very unrealistic in this game. It does not really negatively impact the economy unless you become absolutely screwed due to a weak abundance of military sources. I am shocked to see that you wrote about this as well. Nice work...two great minds think alike.
Ok, I see where you are going and yes I think that Civ didn't produce nthe most accurate sim of postwar economy, but what about postwar economies. Yes they prosper because of the increased employment, but nothing can be all positive in all wars. Did we win the war in Iraq? I would hope to say yes at least in terms of the nations army itself. Well, what were the costs (miniscule compared too a full-fledeged all out war)? You pay the troops, you pay the equipment costs, you also pay for residual resource costs (oil in this case), or even replacement of losses in some cases. After World War II yes we did spend a lot, but did this trend lead to future problems? Did the Gulf war era lead to a poor economic state after we won? Did Bill clintons office, even though it looked good while he was head chief, screw us in the long run after he bomed Iraq on separate occations; we also kicked their ass in that. And again the Iraq war. We can overcome our opponant in a war situation and still suffer consequences. It still costs something to win a war.
Post a Comment