The only reason why america was not bankrupt by world war 2 was:
"According to my parents, who lived through the depression, it was already pretty much over by the time the war started. But I haven't researched this myself. I know that our armed forces were upgrading their equipment during the 30's, and that, along with other government programs, helped to end the depression. Nearer to the start of the war, we supplied England (and later on, the USSR) with military aid, which helped our economy." (WikiAnswers)
Gold standard from peak to crisis (1901–1932)
Abandoning the standard to fund the war
The British government ended the convertibility of Bank of England notes to gold in 1914 to fund military operations during World War I. By the end of the war Britain was on a series of fiat currency regulations, which monetized Postal Money Orders and Treasury Notes. The government later called these notes banknotes, which are different from US Treasury notes. The United States government took similar measures. After the war Germany, having lost much of its gold in reparations, could no longer coin gold "Reichsmarks" and moved to paper currency, although the Weimar Republic later introduced the "rentenmark" and later the gold-backed reichsmark in an effort to control hyperinflation.
In the UK the pound was returned to the gold standard in 1925, by a somewhat reluctant Winston Churchill. Although a higher gold price and significant inflation had followed the WWI ending of the gold standard, Churchill returned to the standard at the pre-war gold price. For five years prior to 1925 the gold price was managed downward to the pre-war level, causing deflation throughout those countries using the Pound Sterling. This deflation reached across the remnants of the British Empire everywhere the Pound Sterling was still used as the primary unit of account. The British government abandoned the standard again on September 20, 1931. Sweden abandoned the gold standard in October 1931, the U.S. in 1933, and other nations were, to one degree or another, forced off the gold standard.
Depression and World War II
British hesitate to return to gold standard
During the 1939–1942 period, the UK depleted much of its gold stock in purchases of munitions and weaponry on a "cash and carry" basis from the U.S. and other nations. This depletion of the UK's reserve convinced Winston Churchill of the impracticality of returning to a pre-war style gold standard. John Maynard Keynes, who had argued against such a gold standard, became increasingly influential. He proposed a more wide ranging version of the "stability pact" style gold standard, later expressed in the Bretton Woods Agreement. (wikipedia)
America didn't go bankrupt because it was a major exporter of weapons and other goods during world war 2. Also most countries relatively speaking, recently got of the gold standard and the dollar was stronger then than it is today. An ounce of gold in 1939 was $35, today it is $920. Mater of fact over the last 5 years the value of gold has gone from $350 an ounce to $920. That's a runaway rise, an exponential rise; meaning runaway inflation. Do you know where gold is projected to be in the next 2 years, $3500 an ounce, get that through your heads (lol, Mcain said he would stay in Iraq for a 100 years...stay in the middle east for a 100 years, ha!!!).
Listen up, you Mcainites and Romneyites, your getting an education today:
Fifty Years of Presidential Wars
Has a president the constitutional authority
to initiate a conflict?
By Paul W. Lovinger
A half-century late, atrocities from the Korean war have made the news: first, massacres of civilians by U.S. troops; next, killings of political prisoners without trial by South Korean soldiers and police. Fifty years have passed since President Truman began what he termed a "police action" to stop "aggression" on June 27, 1950. It became a major, three-year war, in which North Korea and Communist China were fought to a stalemate. And it was the first U.S. war in which a president asserted a right to start it.
Truman took his action without asking Congress for a declaration of war, contrary to what his predecessor, Franklin D. Roosevelt, had done on December 8, 1941. Truman said a United Nations resolution gave him authority. But he had ordered armed forces to Korea before the U. N. acted. Moreover, the U.S. never made any agreement with the U.N. to provide armed forces. And anyway, how could Congress delegate away its lawful authority?
Korea was the first in a score of foreign wars entered by presidents without authorization by Congress. The total of unauthorized military or paramilitary operations reaches several score more. The Korean war and later presidents' wars, including Vietnam, took millions of lives, about 113,000 of them American. Congress's failure to reverse Truman's decision established a routine in which (1) the president assumes dictatorial control over war and peace and (2) Congress submits to the seizure of its exclusive, constitutional power to declare war.
President Clinton has ordered wars or acts of war in eight countries, including Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Afghanistan, and Sudan. In 1999, he was fighting Yugoslavia and Iraq simultaneously. He began bombing the Iraqis in 1993 and continues to strike them, and he is intervening in Colombia's civil conflict. He may have nearly started another Korean war, in June 1994: Kim Young-Sam, then South Korea's president, told a Korean newspaper that he had talked Clinton out of plans to bomb the north, Insight magazine reported (6-26-00). Sometimes Clinton has sought support from foreign leaders or international bodies, never obtaining prior approval by the one body that could constitutionally authorize such acts: Congress.
Yet nearly all political candidates are silent on a matter that tears at the heart of our constitutional system: presidential war. Although such autocracy contradicts democracy, few Democrats in politics object. Nor do many Republican politicos protest that our republic's president has assumed the age-old power of monarchs.
Neither Governor George W. Bush nor Vice President Albert Gore has addressed the issue of the war power specifically. However, each has indicated in campaign debates that as president he would send armed forces wherever and whenever he alone decided it was in the interests of the United States to do so.
Founders vs. presidents
"The Congress shall have power ... To declare war," says the U.S. Constitution (Article I, Section 8). To declare war means to initiate war. That was established usage in 1787, when the Constitution was drawn up. The president is "commander in chief of the army and navy" (Article II, Section 2).
Alexander Hamilton contrasted the president's military role under the Constitution -- "nothing more than ... first General and Admiral"--with the British king's power to declare war (The Federalist, 69). "Commander in chief" was not created with the Constitution but was already a century and a half old. It was always strictly a military rank, without the power to decide war and peace. Such power has been claimed for the president by modern revisionists, beginning in 1950 with the State Department, which sought to justify Truman's Korean action.
The founding fathers made abundantly clear that a president could not lawfully commit any hostile act--except to repel sudden invasion--without prior, formal approval by both houses of Congress. "... Congress alone is constitutionally invested with the power of changing our condition from peace to war," President Thomas Jefferson said (to Congress, 1805).
James Madison explained: History demonstrates that the executive is the governmental branch most prone to war. The Constitution "has accordingly with studied care vested the question of war to the Legislature" (letter to Jefferson, c. 1798).
Notorious transgressions included Polk's provocation of war with Mexico, McKinley's Philippine war, and many invasions of Latin America. But not until Truman in 1950 did any official argue that a president had the inherent right to initiate war.
Few condemned Truman's seizure of congressional authority or considered impeachment. Commentators praised his "courage." Some 54,000 American deaths were counted in Korea.
President Kennedy contemplated atom-bombing Russia over Cuban missiles. Presidents Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon produced more than a decade of undeclared conflicts in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia, dooming 58,000 Americans. Usually Congress gave the presidents whatever they asked, including a resolution supporting "peace" in southeast Asia after Johnson had sent bombers to war. Courts timidly ducked every lawsuit to enforce the Constitution.
Presidents engaging in unauthorized hostilities after Vietnam included Ford, in Cambodia's islands; Reagan, in El Salvador, Grenada, Lebanon, Libya, Nicaragua, and the Persian Gulf; and Bush in Panama.
Such actions would not necessarily be legal if authorized by Congress. Treaties binding on the U.S. ban aggression, require peaceful settlement of international disputes, and prohibit attacks on civilians. But allowing one man absolute power over war and peace, life and death -- in place of discussion and decision by 435 representatives and 100 senators -- makes war far more likely. Congress has declared only five general wars and authorized limited war relatively few times.
The framers designed our Constitution to make unnecessary wars unlikely, though their efforts now appear inadequate. As James Wilson, a framer of the Constitution, told the Pennsylvania ratifying convention in 1787, "This system will not hurry us into war; it is calculated to guard against it. It will not be in the power of a single man, or a single body of men, to involve us in such distress, for the important power of declaring war is vested in the legislature at large. . . ."
Here is a Documentary you need to see, without which you cannot fully understand the situation.
Prior to now they have been printing money none stop to finance all these wars, that's what you get when you don't have a gold standard - they could not print more gold, so they made the dollar and they just keep printing out of nothing. So the american dollar is not as strong as it was in 1939. Back then the dollar was 30 times stronger than it is now: Wow!!!
And if you don't think that inflation has not shown on the economy already think again. In new york the subway train used to be 15 cents, now it's $2 and they are talking about making it more right now. I remember when gas was a $1.19, now it's $3.99. Do you get it, america has gone as far as it can go on this monitary system of printing money and creating debt which is the most debt of any country in the world; did you not know this? Why, because we no longer export as much since almost all of our manufacturing has gone over seas and what used to be exports to us, we now manage it financially in taxes and tariffs as imports.
In ww2 we were exporting; the arms, the munitions etc. We were still building, expanding, climbing the mountain. Now we have been at the top, and there is no were else to go but down and we have been going down for sometime now, and on this side of the great mountain, it's steeper and goes farther below see level than the side on which we made our ascent.