Why do we think that nations are relevant in the era of multinational companies?

Why do we think that nations are relevant in the era of multinational companies?

because of monetary and fiscal policies

The biggest countries influence these multinationals which in turn influence the rest of the world.

>when the first post is also the best post

/thread

Because they are still relevant?

Whew lad

The Eurozone is a federated, multinational monetary union. In the future it will possibly be also fiscal union. As more and more things become privatized and streamlined, less state bureaucracy is needed to mainten them. And state bureaucracy =/= nation anyway. May I remind you of the Soviet Union?

I see more non sequiturs than words in your argument.

>The Eurozone (..) will possibly a fiscal union
so what
>As more and more things become privatized and streamlined, less state bureaucracy is needed to mainten them
more privatization means more auditing/control, thus more bureaucracy. You can't assume that one effect will be stronger than the other.
>state bureaucracy =/= nation
if by nation you mean the German definition of Nation (ethnicity, language, territory), what are you even trying to say with this thread OP
>may I remind you of the Soviet Union
well boy, do it as I don't understand what's your argument

Greeks confirmed niggers, 80IQ

I said nations, not nations states. Sup Forums is a board that supports ethnic nationalism, not an abstract state like the Soviet Union. My question was why are such states needed in todays economy. You said that they are needed for monetary and fiscal policies, and I proved that they aren't, by the experience of the Eurozone and its expected future (more countries adopoting the Euro and starting to have fiscal policies as well). What is it that your inferior Polish mind failed to comprehend?

Also regulating something obviously needs less bureaucracy than actually running it, and that's why it increases efficiency. I can assume that this effect will be stronger than the other because it has been happening since the beginning of capitalism.

Because nations have borders, and borders keep out the muzzies

>borders keep out the muzzies
since when?

Perhaps it wasn't clear, when I say nations I refer to ethnic nationalism, not sipmly having a state and some borders.

>Sup Forums is a board that supports ethnic nationalism, not an abstract state like the Soviet Union
Sup Forums is a diverse board and not a political party. You fell for a selective attention brain meme which happens only to low IQ people.

>I proved that they aren't
As for now, fiscal and monetary policies are more complex than you think and they are divided between the EU and the countries inside it. Banalization is also a brain meme typical of stupid people like you.

You Turk genes are too strong. Time to be an here cryptoroach

So you agree with me that ethnic nationalism is an outdated project for 2016. Great, since you didn't present any arguments that suggest otherwise.

> by the experience of the Eurozone and its expected future (more countries adopoting the Euro and starting to have fiscal policies as well).
Have you not been following global politics at all?
Anti-EU sentiment grows stronger day by day because as it turns out, citizens of a given country don't care about what benefits multinationals. They care about what benefits them and their country

In ten years, there may not even be an EU anymore.

>So you agree with me that ethnic nationalism is an outdated project for 2016
At this point you either are retarded or you have some problems with the English language

That's irrelevant, you said it yourself: sentiment.
I'm talking about the economic realities, this sentiment will be crushed as quickly as it was created by the likes of propagandists like Alex Jones and others.

Another post with no arguments. Great, explains why you are more useless than the Turks you make fun of.

Multinational corporations could easily manage their own monetary and fiscal policies

>this sentiment will be crushed as quickly as it was created
What makes you believe this?

Do you even read what you write

In the long run that will happen as well. But in the mid-term it's more likely that it will be done by a coalition of state actors and private organizations. I'm not an ancap because I don't consider it realistic right now, but in the future, sure.

4th post with no arguments: Keep it up Pole, you're entertaining.
The autistic screeching of the crowds doesn't make food, otherwise they'd live like kings in Cuba and Venezuela.

>The autistic screeching of the crowds doesn't make food
But it does determine election results, which in turn influences monetary and fiscal policy

And it's not even just "the crowds". The EU will start to take even more blows from my own country in about three weeks from now. Our new administration doesn't like the idea of free trade whatsoever, not to the EU or its trading partners, not to mention the whole consorting with Nigel Farage. European products will likely receive heavy taxes, and China will likely lose many American investors, stopping Europe from getting cheap imports.

These things will only add fuel to the anti-EU fire, as will the fact that Wilders has a real chance to win in the Netherlands.

But anyway the point is that with the concept of the nation state as it is now, as powerful as money is, the vote is still what rules the world.

>But it does determine election results, which in turn influences monetary and fiscal policy
Not necessarily. What we've seen in the recent years is that governments talk big but in the end follow "the voice of reason".

I can't comment on Trump, even though I respect your opinion. He might change things, he might be the voice of the people. My opinion is that you are in for a yuuge disappointment, and I don't say that with malice. I enjoy Trump, I don't care much about liberal policies, I think Hillary is scum. But I just don't see how Trump can change the economic precedent of the modern post-WW2 basically.

>Why do we think that nations are relevant in the era of multinational companies?

because we need to be confined into a box, also need to hate each other for easier profit

>governments talk big but in the end follow "the voice of reason".
And they do this because they are invariably controlled by multinational lobbyists.

I myself am keeping expectations low on Trump, but I'll be damned if isn't the best shot we've had since before the turn of the century. If he is controlled, he's clearly not controlled to the degree that we've seen most politicians controlled

Anyway, the fact remains that America is one of the most powerful economies in the world and it has what is unquestionably the most powerful military. If any one country can have a domino effect on the world, it's us, especially us in an alliance with Russia. The potential is there. And we can definitely get things done since the party Trump ran on has a majority in every branch of government now even if they are only nominally on his side. Regardless, if anything will happen, it will be now.

As for, you, see if you can't get Golden Dawn elected. If they are, you may just see for yourself how economic paradigms can change

Do you like the Mutant Chronicles lore? I really like it. Who would you be?
Me: Dark Legion or Cybertronic.