Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Nikov]

Hello, I'd just like to point out that the most sucessful economy in the world is china, an old school communist country. And that America can afford his Stupidianism because china pay for it. Europe is goin the same way.

You mean the country that was failing really really hard until it had capitalist reforms?

*cough*

Hey look, a country took a step toward economic liberalism, just like how the Coolidge era was a step toward economic liberalism, and both did really well. Who hates economic liberalism? Oh the left does. Always great when everyone tries to make it a 'blame his party' debate. But on that track, look what leftist President failed to bring home a trade agreement with South Korea and was given a stern talking-to by China and Germany?

I'm going back to playing DF, return to your mutual agreement on how great statism is.

[RedKing]

I'm going back to playing DF, return to your mutual agreement on how great statism is.

Translation: I'm taking my ball and going home, since you won't let me spout bullshit uncontested.

Remember Nik, Losing is Fun!

[Nikov]

I'm going back to playing DF, return to your mutual agreement on how great statism is.

Translation: I'm taking my ball and going home, since you won't let me spout bullshit uncontested.

Remember Nik, Losing is Fun!

Translation: This thread devolved into something hateful and uncivil but getting the last word in is my way of saying, nyaaa-nyaaa.

[mainiac]

Yes, the left must hate economic liberalism.  That is why Norway and Sweden are both held up as shining examples of social democracy in action and are both economically liberal.  Corporations are free to operate, they have free trade and they try to avoid unnecessary state owned companies.  For instance after nationalizing the banks after a bank crises, Sweden privatized them in the years to come.

It's almost as if the slippery slope argument is a load of shit.

[Eagle_eye]

well, those private corporations don't give a crap about the enviroment, so their glaciers certainly will be going down a slippery slope... that's the main problem with for profit corporations- they don't care about anyone else's well being, as that would interfere with making money.

[Phmcw]

That's not really a problem, that's the government's job.
The problem is that the corporation want to get rid of the government to avoid being restricted  by ethical, social and ecological concern. And that they have a lot of money they can invest nearly freely in lobbying (in the us, in Europe there is restrictions).

[Eagle_eye]

until eventually it reaches a point where the corporations may as well be the government. Look at tobacco and marijuana. tobacco is legal, marijuana is not. marijuana however, is not a form of slow suicide. Any guesses as to why tobacco isn't illegal? coughbribescough

[Leafsnail]

Hey look, a country took a step toward economic liberalism, just like how the Coolidge era was a step toward economic liberalism, and both did really well.

ITT: Nikov rejects any statistics given to him from any source, then selectively quotes a massive TWO examples in order to prove his position irrevocably.

[ed boy]

Hey look, a country took a step toward economic liberalism, just like how the Coolidge era was a step toward economic liberalism, and both did really well.

ITT: Nikov rejects any statistics given to him from any source, then selectively quotes a massive TWO examples in order to prove his position irrevocably.

You have to be careful of statistics. It is very easy for someone to manipulate statistics to try to get the result they want.

[Leafsnail]

Especially if you use only 2 examples.

[Eagle_eye]

what? no... clearly those are both typical and not at all unusual examples, and all social progress and improvement in the lives of the majority is the work of evil satanist nazi fascist hippie communists muslims from kenya... right?

[PenguinOverlord]

20% of all commies are Oba-Kidding.

[Chattox]

I believe that there is a clear-cut line between who supports communism and who doesn't here, and that is whether they play DF with economy on or not.

[Grakelin]

Dwarf Fortress is actually a pretty decisive argument against Capitalism. Just when things look perfect for your dwarves thanks to a planned, regulated economy, you switch to a free market economy and there is so much greed, corruption, poverty, and inefficiency that the settlement falls in on itself.

[Aqizzar]

ITT: Nikov rejects any statistics given to him from any source, then selectively quotes a massive TWO examples in order to prove his position irrevocably.

You have to be careful of statistics. It is very easy for someone to manipulate statistics to try to get the result they want.

This is another one of those intellectual platitudes people repeat to each other to convince themselves they're smarter than the information they're given.  Is it possible to pick and choose information to make a point?  Of course it is.  That absolutely does not mean that every time someone inserts some numbers into an argument that you don't like, that they must be lying.  Take for example my post-

Spoiler: For size. (click to show/hide)

Let's look at the Census Bureau's numbers for Federal Aid to State Governments over some recent years, 2000-2007.  And those of you insisting that a little personal, moral, and fiscal responsibility in government would solve the spending question should pay close attention, and strain your brains to remember which people were in charge of federal spending at the time.  Compare these to state populations, specifically the biggest state (California, running at a whopping deficit) versus the smallest state (Wyoming, running a tiny surplus):

California - 36.9 million people, $46billion in aid in 2005 = $1250 per person.
Wyoming - 0.5 million people, $2billion in aid in 2005 = $4000 per person.

Wow, look at that, I'm comparing numbers to other numbers.  I must be MANIPULATING THE DATA to reinforce the argument that I want, completely irrespective of objective reality.  Never mind that these aren't even "statistics".  The point I wanted to make was that lower-population states get more aid money per person from the federal government than higher-population states do.  To support that point, I used the Census Bureau's own numbers on federal aid and the population of the states, then applied some basic arithmetic to make a ratio.

If you're going to spout that using "statistics" (which apparently means numbers of any kind) is a quick and easy path to lying, you must first demonstrate what nefarious argument you're talking about.  Nothing about discussing politics pisses me off faster than people spouting platitudes as a shorthand way for dismissing an argument.

Dwarf Fortress is actually a pretty decisive argument against Capitalism. Just when things look perfect for your dwarves thanks to a planned, regulated economy, you switch to a free market economy and there is so much greed, corruption, poverty, and inefficiency that the settlement falls in on itself.

While it is certainly hilarious to watch their little societies fall to pieces once the shops open and the rent collector comes around, I honestly don't know what kind of economic system Dwarves use.  I mean, you've got globally fixed prices, assigned-labor, private ownership, fixed rent, an aristocracy that can appropriate any unclaimed items they find without paying, free universal healthcare, and absolutely no social security.  It's a pretty baffling little system.