The Economic Consequence of the Peace

                        
While watching football matches on T.V, I found out that some players are always looking for an opportunity to fight each other especially when they are fouled. In most cases, there are pushes and shoves, chest to chest combat but none ends in a real fight. The players are obviously scared of the sanctions that might be imposed on
them if they venture into a fist fight. Apart from being sent off from the match, they might be fined huge amounts of money or worse they might be banned from football…. Ok.

         Economic consequence of peace is an academic paper presented by a popular Economist John Maynard Keynes in 1919 as an economic way of stopping countries from going to war with each other. He presented this paper at a meeting held by world leaders on how to punish Germany (the Nazis) for starting the World Wars. In the topic HOW TO PAY FOR THE WAR, in this paper he stated the guidelines that would punish Germany and stop other countries from starting up a war.

         Keynes wrote that after a war, the price for the war has to be paid by the country that lost in the war not minding whether it is your country that started the war or not. Once a country is vanquished (loses) after any war, the country will have to pay for the war and the victorious country will not pay a dime for the war. But this payment will not be made in the form of a stipulated amount of money or a fixed amount of billions of Naira, the payments will be made through what Economists call TRANSFER PAYMENTS. All the goods and services coming from the country that lost to the winning country of the world will be made so cheap that companies producing in that country that lost will not have the incentive to continue producing. Also, all the goods imported from winning countries of the world into that vanquished country will be made so costly to the extent that people of the vanquished country will have to pay through their nose to buy these goods. For instance, if China and Nigeria undergo a war and Nigeria defeats China in the war, China will pay for the war. So all the goods and service coming in from China to Nigeria will be made very cheap that everybody in Nigeria can have it while the goods and service exported to China from Nigeria will be made so costly that the Chincos will pay high amounts to have them, this way, the Chinese will be punished for losing the war. Remember that this concept does not ask who started the war and who retaliated once you lose you will have to pay (this is called UNILATERAL REPARATION). You may wonder, what if China is not buying anything from Nigeria or what if Nigeria is not buying anything from China; but the truth is that the world today is so complex that no country can survive entirely on its own, top countries like America, Germany still imports some of the things they need. Countries depend on each other for survival.

           While thinking of this concept, I was able to derive a solution for our footballers that wish to fight and which I think FIFA should consider… if a player wants to fight, the referee should allow them to fight but if you fight and you are beaten up, you be sent off and banned for some months, while the other player that beat you up will continue playing untouched. This way before you even go to push a fellow player you have to be sure you can beat up the player or else remain calm… lol

Also, I saw this concept alike with Igbos or Biafrans, they have not been able rise up to power in Nigeria after they were beaten in the Nigerian Civil war. With no sentiments, do you think Igbos are still paying for the war?