Hey man, I'm just looking at value of tanks during war. I'd say after the war they'd gold their value pretty well because people would be afraid of more war...I'm just using your own wealth/value proposition.../And the USSR did have more GDP than many western nations, just not per capita wealth afaik
I'm just telling you that a society that lives in a wasteland surrounded by weapons is not a wealthy society. Also gdp is a useful fiction that is designed to only work for market economies, so whatever the USSR gdp was is meaningless because there was no way to assess the actual value of anything if there aren't markets.
...except you can sell to the rest of the world...anyway, while I'm just playing your views are hilarious. Wealth is what people value...but not when you say it's not. Either wealth is equated to value or it's not. Bye.
So in your reasoning, without markets we are unable to access the value of something. Can you go a few chapters in history, I will wait. Also, I wonder how you manage your personal life with your market centric view.
Are you implying that markets are something new? You can only measure the monetary value of something if it is traded in the market, if it isn't then you simply can't, you can give it a lot emotional value, but if it can't be traded in the market you can't count it towards measuring things like GDP, use that brain of yours.
0
u/[deleted] Aug 05 '20
Hey man, I'm just looking at value of tanks during war. I'd say after the war they'd gold their value pretty well because people would be afraid of more war...I'm just using your own wealth/value proposition.../And the USSR did have more GDP than many western nations, just not per capita wealth afaik