Talk:Peace dividend
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
-
- The discussion at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Peace dividend resulted in an unanimous keep decision. The vfd subpage has now been closed down and is kept as a historical archive. Mgm|(talk) 20:05, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
This page badly needs some citations. Who has used the term in relation to guns and butter? Who has applied the term to the end of the cold war? Names (of recognised authorities), dates and references please. Otherwise this is hearsay. Andrewa 11:06, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- I think the problem with the version you saw was that the article was portraying the "peace dividend" as a proven concept in economics. I can find no evidence that this is the case. It is, however, a well established political slogan. It was used ad nauseum in the US Congress during most of the 1990s. I'm sure it was also used in political arguments in European countries but I don't remember the specifics. I've taken a crack at moving the tone of the article to a more neutral point of view. I'm still not sure it's there yet. Rossami (talk) 22:25, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
-
- Point taken, although I'm one of those cynics who doubt that anything is or ever will be a proven concept in economics. As soon as a model or theory is published, profit-takers exploit it, and it stops working. There's no way around this that I can see, and as a result, economics is just politics + statistics. Hiding this basic result is very much in the political and economic interests of most economists, of course. Andrewa 23:08, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I live in Alabama, in the southern United States, and (believe it or not), the concept of Peace Dividend from the Guns vs. Butter model is actually taught in public schools. Of course, we also have a disclaimer in science class on the textbooks stating that evolution is "just a theory", so we're all pretty backwards down here; nevertheless, backwards or not, in public schools in Alabama, the concept of "peace dividend" is taught as though it is an established concept. But I'm no economist -- just putting the info out there for future readers. Eric Herboso 23:03, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Pyat rublei 1997.jpg
Image:Pyat rublei 1997.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 11:32, 6 July 2007 (UTC)