Economics retard here, how much does national debt matter?
Is it just something you add onto and say 'the next generation will deal with it'?
20 trillion is obviously a gigantic sum of money, but if the debt is something that you just assume future citizens will deal with, why not just ramp things up to 40 trillion?
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
usdebtclock.org
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Ultimately it is simply a measure of how wealthy the wealthiest bankers are. Their fortune is based on owning the huge debt of every country in the world. Underneath that is the debt of every person in the world, since governments need to raise cash from their citizens to pay off the debt.
When countries can afford to pay more, interest rates rise and they have to pay more debt back. Vice versa when economies go bad interest rates go down, it's not in a parasites interest to bleed a host to death.
Look up the videos by Ronald Bernard and he lays it out pretty plainly. Your pic is just an illustration of how we are all going to be squeezed dry in years to come, and how our descendants will be enslaved completely legally and be made to believe it is right.
Couldn't you just exterminate the bankers quickly before they had the ability to engineer a crisis?
>how much debt matters
most people here won't be able to give you a real answer OP.
the truth is it depends on your GDP. debt doesn't really "matter" until it can't be paid back. in the case of the US, the vast majority of our debt is not to foreign entities, but to our own people. social security and medicare. so when millennials get older and don't get the entitlement programs they voted for (which conservatives told them were not economically feasible) you're going to see a total god damn collapse. you're going to see people starving, unable to get medical care, and the government literally without the physical funds to do anything about it.
US prints currency, so when this happens the US will try to pay its debts by overprinting cash. and what happens when governments overprint their cash? it's called currency collapse and hyperinflation. and when that happens, get ready for a real fun fucking ride. that's what's going on in venezuela right now, BTW. people are hunting dogs in the street because they have no other food.
and then factor in that the US such a central force in teh worlds economy. it's not like venezuela or greece, where the world economy can likely recover. so there's a good chance that our economic plight will set off a global economic firestorm and make some real problems.
but as for whether or not this is coming in 5 years, 10 years, or 20 years, it's hard to say.
if hillary got in, it would happen by the end of her second term, but trump is actually growing the GDP and quelching some spending. so there may be a chance to stave it off a little longer.
thing to remember is this is intentional. they want to crash the US to take away its constitution and bill of rights and create a communist state.
wikipedia is bluepilled, and they say the end game is "universal basic income". that's just a pretty code word for communism though.
I hope so or its going to be really shitty. The economic boom it'd bring would be incredible too.
In the US it is 100% irrelevant because mathematically it can never be paid off and can only grow. The only thing that matters is that the USD is seen internationally as a currency that will be accepted in trade.
well researched and thought out response... a Sup Forums artifact
Bloody grim forecast user.
Time to prepare then...
It's just ZOG leverage
that's why Japan's debt doesn't really matter because over 90% of it is held domestically
Good post. I'll just add that the point where the debt can't be paid anymore and the borrower is at the mercy of the banks, is at the discretion of those same banks. Pretty scary.
>Japan's debt doesn't really matter
>domestic
not necessarily. It really depends on how much confidence your debt holders have in repayment. Domestic debt holders (like citizens with bonds) can be spoon fed info that reinforces confidence. So yes. Usually it is better for debt to be held internally but that also means it will directly effect its citizens if things go south
people are actually going to learn very fast what a scam banking really is when our government prints out tons of money to pay it's debts, the currency tanks and everyone has to go to the bank because bread costs 50 dollars and *gasp* it turned out their money isn't there, because their bank was never actually HOLDING their money for them, because we use a fractional reserve banking system.
this is something that actually happens and is called a "bank run"
it WILL happen in the US, as well as the UK and some other nations eventually if our debt situation isn't curbed and we begin making fiscally responsible, conservative, right-wing economic and entitlement policies.
No it won't moron you have no idea how the system works
That's OK. The government will put everybody on the dole to prevent revolution at that point.
Ideally at the same time they'll start bailing in the banks and turning the retirement plans and muni bonds and everything like that into federal annuities. Communism finally achieved.
It's been tried. But 6 grillion was not enough
nice fuckin' response bro. totally well thought out, well sourced, and well reasoned. you really BTFO'd me and my stupid basic facts of economics.
your little "no ur stupid" comment is literally every communist talking point ever when it comes to this discussion, BTW
As you describe. But I do think people are waking up to this and what will put the brakes on is that people will start collecting precious metals like brass and lead which can be administered using the precious metal of steel such that when the "collapse" begins the foolish grasshoppers that were addicted to the gibs will become extinct in short order. So the "collapse" part will be over in a week or so and the responsible survivors will finally be rid of the parasites.
that's not actually true at all. contrary to popular leftist belief, the US government very provably has a finite amount of funds, and the dollar itself is very sensitive to manipulation and its economic context.
for example if your assertion here were actually true, then the price of the US dollar would stay constant. in case you don't know, it fluctuates rather wildly, and currency traders make mucho dollars manipulating it and trading it.
your claim that "the government will just put people on the dole" is a leftist fantasy. the whole point is that the government won't have the money. and so it will print money to pay and fulfill it's legal contractual obligations to its own people. but when that happens, invariably, the price of the US dollar falls.
so you get hyperinflation, where a loaf of bread literally costs 50 dollars.
god leftists really literally don't understand the first thing about economics. either that or they are trying to intentionally crash the system and all of their stupidity is actually just propaganda designed to destroy us.
I'm not a Communist myself. I'm just saying after you get a currency collapse, that's when the Communists will see an opportunity to impose a new regime that will be more like global Communism.
The dirty secret is that with the coming automation revolution vast portions of society will be come obsolete. The fluidity of money which our GDP depends on will dry up as people will go out of work.
The best way to describe a working economy is with sex. Nobody but a neet wants to jerk themselves off. You want someone else to do it. So a working economy can be seen as a circle of people all jerking off the person to their left. You do a job you don't want to but some one is doing something for you so you keep doing it. The size of your circle is you GDP. Eventually some Jew cums and stops jerking off the person to the left. The circle breaks down and government has to supply the hand jobs.
that part is definitely true dude. did you see the link i posted above to the cloward piven plan?
en.wikipedia.org
(i love how wikipedia uses "universal basic income" as a substitute for "communism").
and the unfortunate side effect of this, after all of the civil strife, rioting, violence in the streets, starvation and discontent, is that they're essentially going to dissolve the united states, tare up the US constitution and the Bill of Rights, and take every government granted right and protection that you as a citizen have in this country and benefit from every single day.
aaaaaaaaaaand then you get Stalin. Literally Stalin.
Actually slightly more than what you owe to your people in pensions you owe foreign governments
A common misconception about fractional reserve banking, and money, is that its real or worth something. It's not. The effective money supply within a fractional reserve system is limited by how much cash banks have and how many times they can loan out. For example, a bank with $10 and the government decides they need 10% of loans given out in cash so they can loan $100. It is not infinite.
A bank run would happen even if it's not a fractional reserve system.
Jup. You're spot on referencing Cloward-Piven in this case.
rly maeks u think wrt importing hoards of 3rd worlders to live on free gibs.
>leftists don't understand economics
user, neither do you
>Actually slightly more than what you owe to your people in pensions you owe foreign governments
ok the thing is that this statement you make is just untrue. see pic related
your other statement is full of inaccuracies and absurdities too. like "money is not real or worth anything". it's clearly real and clearly has demonstrable value. that value is not absolute, it's relative, but it's clearly very valuable and clearly very real as our entire society is founded upon it and revolves around it.
also a bank run literally COULD NOT happen in a non-fractional reserve system, BY DEFINITION, and if you think it could then you don't know what a bank run is.
a bank run is when a fractional reserve bank gives out all of its fractional reserves. so it has no more to gives to the other people who want their money.
if the bank isn't fractional reserve, it always keeps it's cash in its coffers, and it can always repay you.
so no, a bank run can't, by definition, happen in a non fractional reserve bank.
yeah you're the guy who just told me "money has no value" and "banks runs can happen in a non fractional reserve system" and "most of the US debt is owed to foreign countries" ok, yeah, and you have the nerve to say i'm the one who doesn't understand what's going on.
The money will be worthless but the value of things will stay pretty constant. Two or three .308 rounds will still buy a loaf of bread. An ounce of Silver will by the whole shelf. An ounce of gold will buy the whole fucking store. The people who understand this today will survive. The ones who don't will become extinct quickly.
cuz you don't seem to know what a "bank run" even is (despite telling me i don't know what i'm talking about). see pic related pls. yes it is something specifically related to fractional reserve banking, it's even the first line in the wikipedia description.
>does national debt matter
not the debt itself, but the interest paid on that debt,
which bleeds the economy like a blood-sucking vampire banker
this is an interesting argument, i admit, but user serious questions to you. the value of any currency, including the gold and silver rocks, only depends on what value other human place on it.
so when the system collapses, if we're all living in poverty, or like rabid animals, do you really think people are going to want to part with bread, or rounds, for a fucking useless rock??
i dunno man. i just don't buy that whole "buy gold and stock up!" argument.
i believe in the "buy ammo" thing. i believe in the "be prepared" thing. because it's very clear that our governments are intentionally trying to crash our economic system to create civil strife and usher in a "new age of communism".
but i don't think gold is really going to have that much value in a crisis
of course this is just my opinion, maybe i'm wrong.
Mainstream (Keynesian) economists like to say "debt is for rolling, not paying", wich means you can eternally create more debt. Thing is, you can't. You can only have as much debt as your credors believe you can honor. Once you pass that limit you enter the cycle of hyperinflation already discribed.
Stefan Molyneux has a nice series of videos analysing various economies on his youtube channel. You should check it out.
National debt is misdirection to prevent us from looking at the fact that we owe interest on the money being loaned to the gov through the Fed. So long as the US Gov does not own it's own currency the national debt is meaningless
this argument is based on growth though, is it not? like the idea that we'll just grow so much that we'll be able to pay off any sort of debt that we create?
it was true in a sense in the past, because we had tremendous population growth. but now we have 7 billion people on earth and declining birth rates in civilized, industrialized nations.
so how is this argument still valid? how can this continue?
our economy simply cannot grow at the same rate it did in the past, or maybe not even at ANY rate, come a certain point. so how can we keep on piling on debt?
it's an argument based on a very obvious inherent flaw.
it's not real and it's not going to work in the long term. it's worked in the past but now the jig is up and the consequences of that sort of thinking are knocking on our front door.
this whole thing is also a big factor in why our governments have opened our borders to foreigners. they think that "replacement migration" will give them the needed growth to keep this system on life support for a little bit longer. unfortunately their own plans kind of backfire on them when foreigners come to this country and only soak up welfare, cause civil strife, and take low paying, unskilled jobs away from actual americans.
the cloward piven communists though are real happy about it all.
user, add all the foreign countries together. You'll get slightly more than the sum of pensions and social security. The largest chunk in dark blue is US institutions who own treasury bonds.
>money is not real or worth anything
Imagine a transition from a barter system to a currency system. A bread roll now has a dollar representing it. It cannot logically be worth anything because the apparent wealth of the economy has doubled - a bread roll costing a dollar and a dollar in money. As an Islamic economist said, money is a tool to measure value, not value itself. Money represents goods and services the country makes. Money works as a sort of bookkeeping. If you make ten dollars worth of goods and services, you can buy ten dollars of goods and services.
Cost of holding deposits? In a full reserve banking system, the bank cannot make any money from interest on loans. So the deposits slowly dwindle as they need to pay staff, maintain vaults and ATMs. Technically this is may not be a bank run in the sense that money was loaned out that can't be collected now to repay depositors, I guess
the crazy thing is that you say yourself "mainstream economists" profess this belief. you and me know (i see your flag, so i know you know at least a little bit of what you're talking about) that there is no way they can actually believe this. it's patently and demonstrably absurd to think the economy is going to keep growing when the population can't.
so if our mainstream economists are all out there lying, it just leads me to wonder "how fucking deep does this rabbit hole of intentionally trying to crash the economy go"??
Classical Liberal here, she finds my views stronghanded like neo-nazi and acceptable like a cuck, Classical Liberalism is the way to go in this day and age
You can have as much debt as you can pay off. A business, if it can survive, can roll debt perpetually. Trust comes in as refinancing.
But we can spend nearly a trillion a year on the military :^)
>A brighter country today!
>A labor-slave corporate oligarchy tomorrow!
How can the leafs get this based? I'm so impressed at the intellectual fortitude of these great northern people!
Robotics isn't nearly where you think it is friendo
It's still extremely expensive to make a machine that will accomplish automated tasks
Garbage men are still a thing ffs
That's literally one of the most repetitive jobs in the US, yet it hasn't been automated. It's still far cheaper to hire a guy for $10 and hour than it is to buy a $200k machine that needs an engineer, programmer, mechanic and new parts.
Elon Musk and all the other tech giants like Zuckerburg haven't done a manual labor job in their lives and therefore don't understand them.
>user, add all the foreign countries together. You'll get slightly more than the sum of pensions and social security. The largest chunk in dark blue is US institutions who own treasury bonds.
buddy yourself yourself "the US institutions". so your statement that our government owes more to foreign powers than it does its own people is false. good god. come on. foreign debt is roughly a third of our total debt.
>muh money has no value nonsense
i am not even going to get into the metaphysical discussion of "money doesn't have any value"
money clearly has value. it's very valuable. our entire world revolves around it. it's a relative value, not an absolute value, as i've said. but go write this bullshit in a fortune cookie or some bullshit if you want, you can keep it out of actual economic and serious debate.
>full reserve banking system dips into deposits to pay staff
no loser, full reserve banking systems are funded by governments. i've never even heard of a full reserve bank in our world today because the concept is insane, at least from a "private entity" point of view, like what you're talking about.
dude you are just wrong. wrong on everything. i have provided sources. citations. it's been very clear. i've been very clear. i've made it all very clear. if you can't just admit it and back the fuck off i dunno what to tell you.
it's not like i'm here calling you an idiot and looking down on you. we all need to learn shit at some point or other in our lives, and getting involved in discussions on websites like Sup Forums are good ways to do that. but my god man, in this case you are just factually, provably demonstrably wrong, and i feel i've proven the wrongness sufficiently so at this point pls just stop. omfg. just end it so we can have more productive discussion.
Inevitability[edit]
Karl Marx outlined the inherent tendency of capitalism towards overproduction in his seminal work, Das Kapital.
According to Marx, in capitalism, improvements in technology and rising levels of productivity increase the amount of material wealth (or use values) in society while simultaneously diminishing the economic value of this wealth, thereby lowering the rate of profit—a tendency that leads to the paradox, characteristic of crises in capitalism, of "reserve army of labour" and of “poverty in the midst of plenty”, or more precisely, crises of overproduction in the midst of underconsumption.
Solutions[edit]
John Maynard Keynes formulated a theory of overproduction, which led him to propose government intervention to ensure effective demand. Effective demand are levels of consumption which corresponds to the level of production. If effective demand is achieved then there is no overproduction because all inventories are sold. Importantly, Keynes acknowledged that such measures could only delay and not solve overproduction.
governments try to fight with overproduction by increasing spendings (debts) to delay new world depression (last one was in 1930s), but it cant be delayed anymore, and it cant be avoided. also they try to subsidize own companies by giving money to silly goys
instead of creation of debts they need to create new profit motives, for example sell all feminists to slavery lol, take away intitlements from boomers etc, but they are too much cucks to do it.
Half that much
Look it up because clearly you haven't
reddit spacing tho
yeah, you sly pretentious dickhead user. military is actually a small part of our annual spending. and it's a small price to pay for what we get out of it. you don't get overrun by people who would just as soon see you dead.
and BTW, without our military, we can't defend our economic interests abroad either. and guess what that means? even more poverty and less economic leverage here for you.
it's really easy to act like a hippie and whine "no war! no war!" when you benefit every_single_day from the US military and US imperialism, isn't it??
either way, even if you cut military spending entirely, YOU WOULD STILL LITERALLY HAVE A BUDGET DEFICIT so try another angle, you commie leftist nigger.
>your statement that our government owes more to foreign powers than it does its own people is false
Read my original post. I said foreigners owned more than social security, pensions and so on. They're all roughly a third, US institution holdings, social security/pensions and foreign holdings.
>metaphysical
user this is economics. And to some extent, common sense. Money does not have any intrinsic value. Goods and services do. Money, by representing these goods and services, gains a kind of value. Why does the US dollar and a piece of green paper different when they're both just colored fibers?
>full reserve banking funded by governments
Offloading it to the government wouldn't help, they'd need to tax people to pay for it. In hindsight my meaning was different than calling it a bank run. Should've said that customers wouldn't be able to withdraw their all their money.
(((piven))) was born to Russian Jewish immigrants, what a coincidence.
>According to Marx, in capitalism, improvements in technology and rising levels of productivity increase the amount of material wealth (or use values) in society while simultaneously diminishing the economic value of this wealth, thereby lowering the rate of profit—a tendency that leads to the paradox, characteristic of crises in capitalism, of "reserve army of labour" and of “poverty in the midst of plenty”, or more precisely, crises of overproduction in the midst of underconsumption.
this is such empty, meaningless drivel that it could only have come from karl marx.
dude this is entirely made up text. this is word salad. this is typical karl marx saying "look! you have a lot! so you actually don't have a lot!"
oh my oh my! what is the sound of one hand clapping? if a tree falls in teh woods, does it make a sound? jee, i dunno, lets ask karl marx, he sounds like an economic spiritualist guru, of sorts! he certainly says nonsensical things on par with any self help guru on the money circuit today!
you cannot just say "look! you actually have more! that means you actually have less!"
it's totally nonsensical dude.
this shit is so dumb literally only a totally detached, autistic and totally unthinking leftist could ever believe it.
Actually for certain legal and constitutional purposes a lot of military spending is recognized under discretionary spending. Discretionary spending is bills approved by the house for one year or less. The military appropriates about half of all discretionary spending, so total defense spending would be around 890 billion.
>Read my original post. I said foreigners owned more than social security, pensions and so on.
that's great but you were "correcting" my statement, which was that most of the debt in the US is owed to its own citizens. so lets not try to backtrack and backpedal with semantics and gaslighting, ok??
>user this is economics. And to some extent, common sense. Money does not have any intrinsic value. Goods and services do. Money, by representing these goods and services, gains a kind of value. Why does the US dollar and a piece of green paper different when they're both just colored fibers?
now you're conflating two separate statements. discussing the underlying motives and materials behind currency, that gives it its value, is not the same as just blanket saying "MONEY HAS NO VALUE! HURR DURRR!"
that's a fucking retarded statement to make in economics. money has value in our world. our world revolves around money. you want to talk about things that give money it's value. nice. but don't move the fucking goalposts now and try to say "no, i was just talking about the things behind money that DETERMINE its value!"
>Offloading it to the government wouldn't help, they'd need to tax people to pay for it
you understand 1) there isn't a single full reserve bank in operation in the world today and 2) yes they'd tax people to pay for it, that's obviosuly how a federal government funds anything. that has nothing to do with your stupid statement that "a full reserve bank would have to take their payroll out of their deposits".
>In hindsight my meaning was different than calling it a bank run. Should've said that customers wouldn't be able to withdraw their all their money.
i like that you're just admitting that you weren't right, because you patently weren't, but what you're still saying still isn't 100% right, but whatever. it doesn't really matter at this point.
that's true, but in Japan's case the government, finance and industry are basically one entity. Also, they're sitting on the highest amount of citizen saving and these citizens are loyal to the cause.
Marx is correct, nobody rejects his thoughts. he was evil and man, but he was not stupid.
Keynes is also correct, he was not so evil so he proposed better solution - to delay it.
it not about having a lot lol, it is about profit margin
overproduction is cased by falling profit margin and it leads to wars. you need to exhange goods and services to be on top
then you fuck people and they are your sevants, they pay rent and interest rate to live lol, but everybody wants to be on top and their life is limited
when profit from operation falls than voluntary exchange loses sense and crisis starts, because majority will calculate that to incpeed accumulation you need to change methods, even if they include violence
by majority i means majority of clever people, silly are not included
main concern is "profit" and accumulation. they did not know how to prevent loses.
but neither marx nor Keynes were able to solve it.
ok so you're still talking about the military being roughly 23-24% of the budget. with entitlements being 60% PLUS the discretionary spending for entitlements (if we're gonna start counting those).
so the other user really still has no point.
unless you're going to suggest that we totally abolish the military.
did you see what happened when obama pulled us out of Iraq? he basically founded ISIS by doing that. so the entire argument is a patently retarded argument in every way. and even modern history has proven it to be true, aside from the just the common sense that should tell you that you need a good, strong military to defend you in this vicious, barbaric world.
evil and mad
>Marx is correct, nobody rejects his thoughts
surely this is 100% the truth. i've literally never heard anyone reject marx!
>Keynes is also correct, he was not so evil so he proposed better solution - to delay it.
a solution to a fake problem that didn't exist.
or maybe it was just the solution to the "problem" of people living in abundance and relative comfort.
>then you fuck people and they are your sevants
the only reason peopel are "servants" today is because of big government leftists like you who bury the ordinary man with regulations and shower corporations with special permissions and subsidies.
INB4 "but i don't support those subsidies!"
no, but you support big government, which is inherently corrupt, and which inherently favors the rich and powerful, while oppressing the people. so stfu, you personally are to blame for it. personally. like literally personally. go look in the mirror. because it's really you and people like you that have been the genesis of our problems.
>but neither marx nor Keynes were able to solve it
what a fucking surprise
Im an economics graduate, as I love the subject and used to think the world could be better off with more enlightnment in the area.
It's sad to realise universities are merely indoctrination camps and nothing will really change unless we fix that. It's not the economy tha will save the world, but the cultural understanding that government should never be allowed to meddle in crucial areas such as education. While there are subsidies to research and "education", the academy will play the government's song.
Here's how a society becomes great: Great culture will bring great law, that will bring great economy and then great military. Marxists understand this very well and attack the pillar: culture.
pretty much everything you say is spot on in my view
>Marxists understand this very well and attack the pillar: culture.
yeah this is the classical, fundamental flaw conservatives have in their dealings with leftists.
the leftists play up this "well intentioned" narrative really well.
the conservatives literally believe they are people who actually WANT good things for the world, but are just "a little bit misguided".
what they DON'T know is that leftists are actually all inherently malicious, by virtue of their ideology itself. it takes an emotionally depraved, craven personality to gravitate to that sort of evil, fundamentally flawed mentality and belief system.
they only want to destroy shit and feel powerful while they do it.
meanwhile leftists genuinely believe that conservatives are evil and want nothing but bad things for them and the world.
why does this misunderstanding happen?
simple quirk of human nature, really.
humans tend to project their subjective inner experiences onto others. motives, intentions, feelings, sense of decency and morality. so conservatives project their overall positive motives and intentions on to the leftists, and say "well, they're good intentioned, just misguided", and the leftists project their bloodthirsy, power hungry, destructive motives and intentions onto the conservatives and say "THEY'RE FUCKING EVIL AND THEY'RE RUINING THE PLANET AND THEY'RE STUPID AND THEY MUST BE FUCKING MURDERED OFF!"
You have never considered that the opinion people have of conservatives it's based on actually looking at conservatives behave?
Or is this projection ruse your only argument for all the things they do on a regular basis?
you speak like leftist LOL
problem exists it is in nature of capitalism
capitalism is about exchange of goods and accumulation of assets
main operation is an exhange of goods between sides to get profit.
i love capitalism and i live according to its rules of acquisition lol i earn , accumulate and develop myself to propose more and have better position. but many poeple do same things, also i will buy slaves when i will be old. but somebody must be my slaves.
also i collect rent. i spend almost nothing for shit.
big people like oligarchs try to depreeve me and people like me from value to get profit, because value that we added to own wealth is value that is not added to their and they want even more.
if somebody cant sell goods than he decreases price or destroys them to increase price (if it is possible). he may even have loses, so he will reduce production etc, such overproductions begins. all operations must lead to profit and acquisition of real value (part of value that has market value is unlreal and is a part of a bubble)
government only delays it by giving money to "slaves" by increasing debt or by spending on infrastructure and weapon because as soon as overporduction hits cucks will be reduces to slaves (if they belong to race of buttfucked cucks)and people will arm themselves if they belong to race of free (like germans and russians did before ww2)
A debt is only as valuable as the ability of a collector to come to collect; and as nobody has the capacity or desire to collect on our debt, it's virtually(literally) free money to do whatever we want with with the "intention" to pay back someday.
Debt-babbies are the fucking worst, MUH DEBT CLOCK
Just one more try. Let's just give it ONE more try.
conservatives behave fine. leftist are responsible for more violence, more vitriol, they're proven to be more likely to cut off their peers because they disagree with their political stances, all sorts of demonstrable shit.
conservatives are also more likely to be family men / women. have children, raise them, stick around to raise them, provide for them. more likely to follow the law. more likely not to be in debt or in prison.
like just wtf are you talking about? the behavior of conservatives is just by and far, lightyears, provably and demonstrably better than that of leftists.
oh yeah, and we don't burn cities down or beat the shit out of people when we lose elections
>Is it just something you add onto and say 'the next generation will deal with it'?
That certainly seems to be the way Australian politicians like to deal with it.
>conservatives behave fine.
They don't, they are extremely reactionaries and will act violent under the minimal excuse, they know no boundaries (might makes right principle), they glorify murder and stealing as long as it's done in their benefit and in politics are heartless monsters.
This aren't projections, I hope you have enough introspection to see where i'm going with this, because right wing ideologies aren't violence free alternatives.
>you speak like leftist LOL
yeah i really speak like a leftist, decrying big government and calling for deregulation to stop corporate supremacy. what a fucking leftist i am. hurr durrrrr. sure.
maybe you just don't know a fucking thing about politics, economics, nor do you even know what "leftist" or "rightism" really is.
>literally trying to define capitalism
are you fucking serious right now?
go back to fucking kindergarten, you childnigger.
BTW, its clear from your speech pattern that you're not white or a native born american / westerner. pls explain to me why all of the muddskins have to support marx and be all communist subversives?
what this comes down to is the racial IQ gap. at the end of the day, whites are smart enough to see where you're wrong, and why communism fails, fucking niggers and mudskins just cannot get it through their thick monkeyskulls.
>big people like oligarchs try to depreeve me and people like me from value to get profit
wtf nigger you need to learn english.
stop supporting big government then, because it's big government that enables those oligarchs to fuck you over.
you made this problem yourself. you and those like you. stop fucking yourself over with leftism then if you don't like it.
i can't fucking talk rationally to you when your english is so broken, frankly. all i see is you whining "but imma slave" yeah that's right, nigger. if you run to government or corporations and give them power over you, you'll be a slave.
you need to minimize government. make them so small they can't give subsidies, or special permissions, or enforce uneccessary regulations on you.
newsflash, corporations only ever got powerful because your precious beloved "government" propped them up artificially.
get with the program, you marxist faggot. i'm sick you and your peoples ignorant faux intellectual bullshit.
the US has an international debt of 18,2 trillion
hmmmmmm
ummmm citations needed for everything you said
If something like that happened we'd just invade the third world and pillage.
yeah, is the military really going to do that though? for no reason? with no reasonable justification? think about everything they went through to justify iraq, and that still didn't really click in the public consciousness.
and we'd be talking about the invasion of like half of the world, really, to take what we need, to meet our consumption demands, from a bunch of muddy deserts full of AIDs and cockroaches.
and these military people are going to just run off and do this, mind you, without ever getting their paychecks? or at least in an environment where their paychecks are essentially worthless via hyperinflation?
i dunno dude. it's an interesting solution and it's an interesting prediction. but i don't it's ultimately viable or tenable. it won't happen that way, almost for certain IMO.
oh yeah and also i didn't even mention the UN and NATO and other international governing bodies would have a big problem with this. it would sort of upset their plans for global communism, among other things.
I introduce you to Roy Cohn, go ahead google him.
I double dare you.
i am russian.
i like government ,but i want imperial government lol, all european governments originated from ARMIES lol.
but i think that government must be limited only to 5 functions - army, police, tarrifs on border and maintanance of neo-mercantilistic rules, healcare and education in certain circumstances, ownership of certain companies (central bank of cource must work to maintant neo-mercantilism)
such way living space where i live will be in profit and my real value will be safe and operations profitable , so i will not need to fight and use violence.
stability gives profit. government with big army and police gives stability. we are not numerous so we will be even able to avoid overproduction at home by exploiting other markets.
you are stupid. i gave you information from Wikipedia about overproduction and you deny it lol.
i got to go to bed. it was nice talking to you all tonite. some interesting convos. fuck marx. praise capitalism. praise small government. praise freedom. praise the land we live in without starvation or genocide of our own people.
you seriously just tried to justify your condemnation of conservatives by citing trumps lawyer that's been dead for 30 years??
ok kid. i really don't give a shit. i don't need to listen to this shit from some fucking antifa loser who wants to "bash the fash", and tell me how evil conservatives are. lmfao.
i cited some very true, broad, general statistics that are true of conservatives - engage in less political violence, tend to be more religious, tend to be more family oriented, more likely to stick around and raise their children, more likely to be close to their family, less likely to commit crime or be in prison.
and you're claiming that "conservatives are evil" and your big answer for justifying that is "look at this dead lawyer who has been dead for 30 years".
honestly, we could get into a discussion about roy cohn and his ethics, and you would probably lose on that front too, but it's not important.
you need to stop the fucking drugs, you ignorant moron.
i gotta go to bed dude. you didn't post anything from wikipedia and i don't care about wikipedia anyhow. i literally just control F'd it though, you didn't post a single wiki link.
and what now? you're saying the government should only have 5 domains. but then you broaden it to 7 domains. and then you literaly don't include a single domain that would actually include building you any roads or infrastructure.
hmmmmmmmmm, sounds like you've thought all of this out REALLY well.
stay off the drugs man. i've got to go to bed. goodnite.
I actually judge conservatives by the people I talk to here on a daily basis, Roy Cohn it's just a great example of that, Roger Stone it's even more precise, but you will (as you should cause that's why he does it) argue that stone it's not a true conservative because he backs up SJW causes.
The automation does not have to do them all. Just some to have dramtic effect.
I don't think it's tomorrow (10-20 faster if they push for 15hr) but slowly you will see stuff taking over cashier jobs, then long hauls trucks (1 driver with 5 automated trucks in caravan) then sandwich guys etc.
but it will reach a breaking point and it will happen very fast sucking in everything but the most abstract thinking jobs.
I work I the industry.