is the war good for the economy of the countries?

Answer 1

depends, WWII kinda brought the US out of the depression

Answer 2

Generally, no. War is a great stimulant, putting to work many people who would be otherwise unemployed, but the goods and services produced (tanks and military service, say) are essentially nonproductive. Further, unless the regime is authoritarian, the government does not have the ability to take whatever it needs, and as such must acquire debt. The civilian consumption during the war is also lowered as resources are tipped toward military uses (trading butter for guns), even if there are no overt quotas.

Nothing above assumes property damage or loss of life during war, both of which make the problem worse. Wars tend to claim people before their productive working years, and property damage is often heavy.

Further, for losing sides, reparations (which destroyed Germany's economy between the world wars) are crushing.

Answer 3

In the short run, war gives a momentary spurt to the economy, and puts more people to work for a while.

In the long run, it's a bad deal because countries at war tend to pile up a lot of debt, and there's always a day of reckoning when that debt must be paid off.

During WW1, Germany tried to pay off the debt it was running up, by printing a lot new money. The net result was a terrible inflation rate that ruined their economy.

Answer 4

War is the biggest and most profitable business in history. countries go to war for the economy, and power! The US emerged out of WWII as a superpower because of the war. When you go to war, you build and open industry and factories, and begin manufacturing weapons, and employment is up, and money flows. However this is only if your in control. In a war, if your country is getting the **** bombed than forget about it. but in WWII, America was not hit in war or invaded so it just kept producing money and power until it emerged as a superpower.

Answer 5

Sorry to say, but yes. Look at europe after ww2 japan aftr ww2
how bout vietnam. not just US.

Answer 6

I agree with bloom_mall
" For the winner or loser? "

Answer 7

For the winner or loser?