it gave more money for the budget and the economy, which helped increase demand. Also, since people were manufacturing more supplies it could of lead to more jobs.

But once again

increasing government spending increases demand

did it raise the standards of living?

but increasing demand doesn't grow the economy

there is no such thing as "insufficent demand"

increasing demand, as long as it isn't met by a decrease in supply, increases RGDP

GDP isn't a good measure of economic growth

GDP doesn't consider what was made, of what quality

I actually have to leave

sorry

and if it was satisfying consumer demands

Okay

Which it won't be, since you raised demand artificially

I'm pretty sure WWII did raise the standard of living in the Sunbelt area because most of the new military bases were established in that area

But how did that raise the material standard of living?

Well, higher average wages in the area and a lower unemployment rate

Thats not increasing the material standard of living

*yeah i'm bad at terminology*

What is the material standard of living? 😅

Material means good and services

Yup, nevermind lol

GDP is flawed @Kylo Ren , It does not represent production, but overall spending, and is dependent on the techniques that are applied to the calculation of the respective price indices. In a private market economy the aims of economic activity are highly diverse and represent individual and subjective valuations. For an economy that is to serve multiple private needs, the calculation of economic growth makes little sense, if any at all. Each good and service has a different value for each user, and there is no common standard of value available. This is even more so the case, when new products and new kinds of services come to the market. Valuations are not only heterogeneous among persons, but also differ for the same person according to the specific circumstances. Human beings have different needs and wants in different situations, and they experience changes of taste over time. Quality itself is not an attribute inherent to the things, but it is a valuation by economic actors.

I don't know nearly enough about material standard of living to argue it

For example, in WWII gdp growth boomed. But was this raising the material standard of living? Was it fulfilling consumer demands? No. It was just an increase in war machines, tanks, ships, aircraft.

Unemployment falling doesn't mean much all the time either, for example unemployment was almost 0% in WW2. But is that really hard to believe when theres a draft and your nations at war, if every worker had a job in the army and fleet, we'd have full unemployment

and nothing to eat.

@toast Basically an increase in meeting consumer demands

Ahhh okay so in that case it would actually mean that a lot of the material standard of living fell because of the heavy rationing during WWII

And that

Guess you learn something new every day

Keynesians jump over joy because WW2 gave them a stimulus that was so large it "recovered the depression"

but it didn't

But was it real growth? Real growth is production of what people demand, thats entrepreneurship and not central planned.

An economy is so complex, you can't have GDP to measure it's success. Maybe in a primitive economy, but thats not the case anymore.

@toast

What do you believe in anyways?

It's been an interesting few days because like, Thursday, I was a hardcore liberal

lol

Then I actually met conservatives for the first time in my life