Print

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

[Tellemurius]

Per capita only determines how much a individual provides to the GDP.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)

EU doesn't count as a country and if it does they are more fucked up than america right now.

[Phmcw]

Who the hell has higher GDP than us?

Europe.

Per capita only determines how much a individual provides to the GDP.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)

EU doesn't count as a country and if it does they are more fucked up than america right now.

Well, it's one monetary entity. And we aren't nearly as touched than you by economic crisis.

[fqllve]

The economic debate are sterile : the best economic system is known, but the problem is that the govs have no longer any invective to apply it.

I'm sorry, but this is a misrepresentation. If there were a system that were clearly best (by which I take it you can only mean "best for everyone") then we would be using it, because in spite of all our other flaws humans do like things that benefit us.

The problem is that best is an inherently subjective word and therefore essentially meaningless. Basically it just means "I prefer."

[CoughDrop]

The economic debate are sterile : the best economic system is known, but the problem is that the govs have no longer any invective to apply it.

I'm sorry, but this is a misrepresentation. If there were a system that were clearly best (by which I take it you can only mean "best for everyone") then we would be using it, because in spite of all our other flaws humans do like things that benefit us.

The problem is that best is an inherently subjective word and therefore essentially meaningless. Basically it just means "I prefer."

My thoughts exactly.

[Phmcw]

The economic debate are sterile : the best economic system is known, but the problem is that the govs have no longer any invective to apply it.

I'm sorry, but this is a misrepresentation. If there were a system that were clearly best (by which I take it you can only mean "best for everyone") then we would be using it, because in spite of all our other flaws humans do like things that benefit us.

The problem is that best is an inherently subjective word and therefore essentially meaningless. Basically it just means "I prefer."

As best I mean for the country, and for the wide majority of the population.

[Askot Bokbondeler]

whats the best for a country? an efficient fascist state that prosecutes minorities would fit on your definition.

[fqllve]

whats the best for a country? an efficient fascist state that prosecutes minorities would fit on your definition.

I...what? This would not fit any of my definitions of best, except maybe "best at being awful." I don't think homogeny benefits society much if at all, and definitely not as much as having a multitude of competing views.

This is why that word sucks.

[Askot Bokbondeler]

i was talking to phmcw

As best I mean for the country, and for the wide majority of the population.

if it benefits the wide majority and is economically feasible, it fits his definition

[fqllve]

I know, I just don't think it really benefits the majority. Actually, I think it would be detrimental because it would lead to stagnation. Minority viewpoints are essential, and thankfully ineradicable.

[Askot Bokbondeler]

if it prosecutes black and gay people there's still enough diversity in the white majority for stagnation not be an issue

edit: i had accidentally the whole post

[Shades]

if it prosecutes black and gay people there's still enough diversity in the white majority for stagnation not be an issue

edit: i had accidentally the whole post

But if history is anything to go by (hint: it is) a whole lot less beneficial to the majority of people than the increase in diversity provides.
Benign dictatorships are pretty effective while they remain benign though.

[ChairmanPoo]

Or not. Besides, "benign dictatorship" is a relative term which is subject to change at any moment without much warning.

[Phmcw]

if it prosecutes black and gay people there's still enough diversity in the white majority for stagnation not be an issue

edit: i had accidentally the whole post

Yes, actually it would fit my definition of economically effective. I'd still die to avoid it (or kill) but for completely different reasons.
Of course, Fascism is not effective , but I gave China, a violent dictatorship, as an example of blooming economy (despite the crisis even). I just don't happen to judge a system solely on its economical effectiveness.

[Urist Imiknorris]

Or not. Besides, "benign dictatorship" is a relative term which is subject to change at any moment without much warning.

Like anything related to a dictatorship.

[Leafsnail]

Basically, the idea is that you want to get the economy started before paying off the debt.  It's not good having all your debts paid if your country is completely ruined in the process.

I think I heard a statistic that if we taxed all workers 100% of their income, we still wouldn't be able to pay the INTEREST of our debt.

This is, quite simply, incorrect.

American GDP significantly exceeds American debt, let alone the yearly interest.