Take Offline

I'm not making an argument for making war just in order to create jobs (a component of Eisenhower's Military Industrial Complex warning - which he didn't really heed himself, by the way), but Nick's assertion that spending money on infrastructure projects would create jobs, while totally ignoring the fact that reduced spending on war would actually cost jobs, doesn't make any sense at all. At best, it's robbing Peter to pay Paul (taking Peter's job away, giving it to Paul). You might make the argument that Paul deserves the spending more than Peter, but it renders your logic ....... well, it renders it illogical.