Jump to content
Melbourne Football

Express cho self (Politically)


Hendo
 Share

Recommended Posts

Dismantle Belgium. Split it between France and Netherlands. Brussels to be separated and become a special entity as the capital of the EU.

One of easily the most annoying Backpackers I ever meet (And believe me that is some contest) was from Belgium.

He fucken kept me up one night for three hours when I was trying to sleep talking about his side Bruge and Cycling.

I still hate that cunt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of easily the most annoying Backpackers I ever meet (And believe me that is some contest) was from Belgium.

He fucken kept me up one night for three hours when I was trying to sleep talking about his side Bruge and Cycling.

I still hate that cunt.

So, you are also for dismantling Belgium?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont really have an opinion on the matter...

Except a friend of mine at college who grew up there as a kid was very Pro-Belgium, and even through I have not seen her years I wish no misfortune.

In saying that when I think of Belgium I think of that fuckwit Bruge supporter and not her...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Pan-Turkism & Pan-Turanism.

Unity of all Turk and Turkic speaking of the world, as well as members of the wider Turanid race.

greaterturkiye.jpg

greaterturkiye2.jpg

Pic12-TurkWolf.gif?et=x20iXc882103KTjETuaeCQ&nmid=

Long live the Turks.

I'd support a Pan-Turkic state if it were open to tourism.

Want to go through Turkmenistan on a big trip I'm planning (crossing through Central Asia) and that's the toughest place to get into. Looks interesting, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems like the pot is calling the kettle black.

Eurozone crisis?

US debt?

China bailing out the world?

rofl

Eurozone crisis is due to socialist leaning policies*

US debt is due to socialist leaning policies*

China is hardly socialist, their economic rise started when they introduced reforms turning them into a market based economy. When they did have socialist economic policies they had millions of people starving to death.

* High government spending can never be considered a free market economic policy. Government spending a lot more than revenue can never be considered a free market economic policy. Having a central bank setting interfering in the free market to set an interest rate can never be considered true free market policy. These are the things which have caused the current global economic crisis, and they are due to Keynesian economic theory which was considered by many as being "socialist" when it first came out, due to the strong roll the government plays in the economy. Keynesian economics is more socialist than laissez faire as it involves significant government influence in the free market.

Please find some real reason to back your socialist stance which has been proven wrong time and time again throughout history.

Edited by Tesla
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eurozone crisis is due to socialist leaning policies*

US debt is due to socialist leaning policies*

Jesus christ, your entire argument is based on the fact that keynesian economic theory was socialist?

The father of this very theory you're bringing up, John Keynes was anti-socialist ffs.

China is hardly socialist, their economic rise started when they introduced reforms turning them into a market based economy. When they did have socialist economic policies they had millions of people starving to death.

Hardly socialist? :rolleyes:

The reforms Deng Xiaoping introduced were a mixture of both state owned enterprises and an open market economy. It's a fusion of the two.

* High government spending can never be considered a free market economic policy. Government spending a lot more than revenue can never be considered a free market economic policy. Having a central bank setting interfering in the free market to set an interest rate can never be considered true free market policy. These are the things which have caused the current global economic crisis, and they are due to Keynesian economic theory which was considered by many as being "socialist" when it first came out, due to the strong roll the government plays in the economy. Keynesian economics is more socialist than laissez faire as it involves significant government influence in the free market.

How is high government spending, in your words, a left leaning policy exactly?

It is integral that that the government plays a significant role in the economy of any country, do you want the army ran by transnational corporations? Some degree of control has to be in place.

Please, think before you type old chap.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesus christ, your entire argument is based on the fact that keynesian economic theory was socialist?

The father of this very theory you're bringing up, John Keynes was anti-socialist ffs.

I said Keynesian economic theory is socialist leaning, not socialist. And its a fact that Keynesian economics is socialist leaning. It involves heavy government involvement in the market, how can you say thats not socialist leaning? Kalecki had many of the same ideas as Keynes and is considered a neo-marxist.

Hardly socialist? :rolleyes:

The reforms Deng Xiaoping introduced were a mixture of both state owned enterprises and an open market economy. It's a fusion of the two.

Yes, and when they moved away from a controlled economy to a more market based economy they went from millions of people starving to death to one of the fastest growing economies in the world. Anyway, if you understood how economic growth works you would understand that as china approaches the same GDP per capita as Western nations its growth will slow and it certainly won't overtake the big western economies in GDP per capita during our lifetimes, if ever. Right now they are just increasing the K/L ratio, that involves diminishing returns and so once they have caught up in terms of K/L they will need increased productivity to grow further, which requires a more market based economy.

How is high government spending, in your words, a left leaning policy exactly?

It is integral that that the government plays a significant role in the economy of any country, do you want the army ran by transnational corporations? Some degree of control has to be in place.

Please, think before you type old chap.

How isn't it a left leaning policy? Its a commonly accepted thing that higher tax, higher spending, and bigger government is a left leaning economic policy while less spending, less tax, and smaller government is a right leaning economic policy. Look at the US primaries and all the republicans trying to prove how conservative they are by saying how they voted against this spending bill and that spending bill.

When did I say the army should be run by a transnational corporation? I dont think even the strongest libertarians would be for something like that. Pretty much the most extreme view you will find is that the government should just be responsible for military and enforcing law and order, with the only involvement in the economy being protecting property rights and enforcing contract law.

Edited by Tesla
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...