BruceVC

Great cooking tips, keep them coming

But one of the most effective ways to sustain and ensure any economy is strong is known as a consumer driven economy which is a huge factor in driving GDP. The point makes sense as basically it involves people having jobs and spending money internally within the country. This is a huge part of the USA economic strength and one I personally believe makes logical economic sense So when you say consumption economy what do you mean? Do you mean the same as consumer spending and what is your concern Here is a good link that summarizes the advantages of a consumer driven economy https://www.thebalance.com/consumer-spending-definition-and-determinants-3305917

Companies nowadays are strongly advised to not negotiate with cyber-criminals who use the likes of Ransomware to try to blackmail these companies and demand money because their are examples of these cyber-criminals still not releasing the encryption keys even when paid In SA I worked at a major insurance company that was a victim of Ransomware and they simply refused to pay and had to restore the data and accept some reputational damage So you dont negotiate as its no guarantee you will have your data accessible again

I dont think people have any kind of real emotional connection with Capitalism, many of us work and exist due to institutions that are intrinsically part of the Capitalist system. Its works and their is historical precedent to confirm this, we are aware their are issues with the free market but its a better option than other systems

I would add to this post you cannot legislate sustainable economic transformation or address inequality in a meaningful way through government interference and policy Economic transformation can only really be achieved through laws and policies that allow business to operate in an environment where it can flourish and not be forced to do certain things. Well meaning concepts like UBI are just a short term fix and can lead to real problems in the long term where some citizens will now have less interest or appetite to work and contribute towards the tax base

Nah, I would say platitudes about Communism and Socialism being viable systems of working governments are way, way overdone

Thanks for sharing, this is the same as your successful University funding program I wish SA had the resources, governance, citizen support and political will to do the same as Finland as our overall society would be much better.

Dont believe anything negative about CDPR 2133, its all fake news and console people who hate the success of the company and dont want to understand that sometimes mistakes happen with the releases of new games

You make some good points as usual on this topic , in the example of Finland what type of homes does the state provide? Are they 1 bedroom, for example, and does the Finnish state pay for rates and electricity and other services and how does a homeless person qualify for a state sponsored home ?

I think this example is what happens when society expects SM platforms to become the judge and jury of what is acceptable content and what is considered offensive comments or hate speech We should not be asking SM companies to police what people post. The exceptions to this is very rare examples like the banning of Trump after the Capitol violence because Trump abused various SM platforms and even though I support this its still controversial

This definitely doesn't make sense and appears to be unreasonable censorship from FB I couldn't find the reason in the article why FB blocked this information, what was their reason because these types of historical truths need to be raised and discussed freely on any platform that believes in freedom of speech where appropriate

Why do you think bacon is bad for dogs, its meat and dogs love meat? Gromnir dont let these far left California liberals convince you that meat is bad for dogs.....next thing you will see a Vegan movement for dogs and people like Hurlshot will be suggesting its a human rights issue if you feed your dog meat

Elerond the issue of how to help the homeless is a global problem that most countries grapple with and you always end up balancing the human rights precedent with the economic reality We have this societal problem in SA as well and its particularly bad in Cpt, worse than JHB actually. What I have realized over the last 20 months is that some homeless people make a choice for a variety of reasons to decide to stay on the streets. You cant help them in the same way that you can help other homeless people and you dont want to waste time and resources on those homeless people

No thats completely inaccurate, the majority of oil companies are global, private sector companies that are listed companies and arent owned by any state ...so you very mistaken

No Elerond you are misunderstanding something about what Chavez did around nationalization, in the 1970's Venezuela created its own state own oil company that had of degrees of control around oil distribution and production and the idea was it was suppose to lead to a form of a sovereign fund like Norway This is not the same thing as what happened in 2006/2007. Chavez forced international oil companies that were operating in Venezuela to give his government majority control of their assets...that is the nationalization I refer to, not what happened in the 1970's We discussed this a couple of months ago where I posted a link that I asked you and Gorthfuscious to read, please read the link again below to understand what Chavez did. https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2017/05/07/how-venezuela-ruined-its-oil-industry/?sh=7b08053f7399 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-nationalizations-idUSTRE65N0UM20100624 The second link also mentions this, to quote "Chavez in 2007 nationalized multi-billion dollar projects in Venezuela’s vast Orinoco oil region, persuading companies such as BP Plc, to accept minority stakes in facilities they had built" Last year he ordered the takeover of dozens of smaller oil service companies as PDVSA, reeling from a sharp plunge in oil prices, struggled to pay contractors. When he was flush with oil cash during a boom in oil prices that ended in 2008, Chavez often compensated nationalized companies fairly, although the 2007 takeovers led to lawsuits from ConocoPhillips and Exxon Mobil. "

Exactly the gradual intention with these types of sanctions but they are not the core reason for the Venezuela economic collapse. That was the fault of Chavez and his nationalization of the foreign oil companies in 2006/2007

We need to question the SA study as it was done with a very low number of people, only 2000 and they had no data around severe Covid so more analysis is required

So any predictions around Trumps possible second impeachment? I doubt he will be impeached for several reasons but mostly I dont think Trumps intention was the actual overthrow of the Capitol and therefore it wasnt " real " insurrection More Republicans I believe will vote to impeach Trump than the last time, which was only Romney , which will make history but you wont get enough votes IMO?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/jennifer-psaki-is-the-new-white-house-press-secretary-she-is-a-connecticut-native-who-grew-up-in-greenwich/ar-BB1cYwys Im very impressed with the new WH press secretary, Jennifer Psaki is doing a good job. To quote from the article they going to bring back " truth and transparency back to the briefing room.” She is cogent, sincere, intelligent and comes across in a reasonable way I also like how part of the new Biden policy is to admit when you get something wrong, its a good start around how the new WH deals with the media which is such an important part of all our Democracies

I am going to do some research and get to you on something to add to my point But Gorthfuscious I still dont think you are understanding my fundamental point, the Russian annexation is considered illegal by every international court. So this needs to be accepted because this is what matters for global recognition And you ask a good question around " do the people of Crimea get a choice " ....they do but not when its against the country that the region belongs to. So in other words the legal answer is " no, the local people dont get to decide on their own " . If you allowed citizens in specific regions of any countries to just decide they didnt like their main country and wanted to break away their would be absolute chaos. Which is why you have laws and detailed strategies how it can be done but its complex and requires compromise and many meetings ...but it cannot possibly be done the way Russia decided to do it

I did see this on Epic and it looked really good but I tend to be overly enthusiastic sometimes on how I automatically respond to game trailers and marketing so I dont always trust myself What is it like ?

You are so naughty....I know you joking right because obviously the Russian Referendum was utterly pointless and had no international legal standing? But on another note, I wanted to know about Austrian food on the food thread ...but lets chat later about that one

Gorthfuscious !!! I am too fond of you to insist on a proper spanking for this cheekiness But I am glad you asked what world I live in because now you allow me to explain to you that you are wrong about the ownership of the Crimea and this is an important point because its also the reason that you cannot have an opinion that " Russia has a legal right to the Crimea " We have had this debate before but I didn't realize you really do believe that you cant demand and expect Russia to give back Crimea. And I really respect your intelligence too much to just accept that you wont understand why Russia can and will give back Crimea. Yes you will have to change your well meaning and supportive of Russia's control of Crimea but I always welcome these types of changes personally because I do believe that I must have accurate views of events of history....so for me when I have learnt new things from you and your views on topics like the Chinese naval expansion I consider them both instructive and informative. I will keep it very simple, the Russian illegal annexation of Crimea has been declared illegal in international courts like the EU and courts that handle international issues like property rights. And its based on the international recognition that all countries have borders and these borders cannot just be redesigned by one party. So in other Russia has no legal right to decide it now owns Crimea without Ukraine agreeing Ukraine will not agree to this so Russia is illegally occupying Crimea, its as simple as that and the only reasonable way you could possibly change this fact is if you can provide the link that has the legal document that says " Russia legally owns Crimea " And this needs to be internationally recognized. And this is the only information that matters so even though we can go your through your other reasons like " Serbia being carved " none of them change the actual reality of who owns Crimea I hope I am not coming across as condescending because I am looking to your response, or other members response , to the Crimea issue

No Zora thats not true. You guys have a very strange view of what the West expects from a new Russian leadership...we all want the same thing. The West would respect a new leader but it must be done Democratically....and the new leader must respect the Democratic principles

Why do you assume the world outside of Putin would accept a Western puppet? We just want a Russian leader who accepts the Democratic process and things like human rights within Russia And of course it would be expected that Russia restores the sovereignty of Crimea to Ukraine