Jump to content

Politics Episode 8: WWF Edition


Recommended Posts

Where does China get it's own money? Do they print there own currency too? We can't be the only nation that just prints money. You typically don't want to print too much because you devalue your own currency.

 

I see a lot of stuff about how all money is backed on the US dollar and the USD is floating. But Aren't they actually all relatively floating compared to each other? I know some are directly based on the USD but I seem to find it hard to believe that China's currency would be.

Edited by injurai
Link to post
Share on other sites

Although before resurrecting the commie ghosts of the 70ies it might just do to stop silly offshore tax dodging in a coordinated effort.

There is a spectre haunting automation...

"I am the expert, asshat." - Hurlshot

"I'm fine with humanity being wiped out" - majestic

Link to post
Share on other sites

Capitalism is the only economic system that allows for a semblance of democracy because of the distribution of ownership. Under socialism you could theoretically claim to be free, but since you have to work for the government, you're only free if you don't care about having a job and eating.

Well we've never tried democracy without a monetary system, so we don't really know. Might work better without it.

 

As for your last point, interesting a similar argument could be laid against capitalism. You cannot not participate, as capitalism in general relies on private ownership of property - and since all property has basically been apropriated, non particupation is practically impossible. Either you're free by work and ownership - or you starve.

  • Like 1

Fortune favors the bald.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Capitalism is the only economic system that allows for a semblance of democracy because of the distribution of ownership. Under socialism you could theoretically claim to be free, but since you have to work for the government, you're only free if you don't care about having a job and eating.

Well we've never tried democracy without a monetary system, so we don't really know. Might work better without it.

As for your last point, interesting a similar argument could be laid against capitalism. You cannot not participate, as capitalism in general relies on private ownership of property - and since all property has basically been apropriated, non particupation is practically impossible. Either you're free by work and ownership - or you starve.

You mean a the free trade system that pilgrims and native indians did? That could be good. It would highlight people's specialties and talents.

Just what do you think you're doing?! You dare to come between me and my prey? Is it a habit of yours to scurry about, getting in the way and causing bother?

 

What are you still bothering me for? I'm a Knight. I'm not interested in your childish games. I need my rest.

 

Begone! Lest I draw my nail...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear, is Mr Trump in a bit of hot water because of some e-mails?

No.

"Good thing I don't heal my characters or they'd be really hurt." Is not something I should ever be thinking.

 

I use blue text when I'm being sarcastic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Capitalism is the only economic system that allows for a semblance of democracy because of the distribution of ownership. Under socialism you could theoretically claim to be free, but since you have to work for the government, you're only free if you don't care about having a job and eating.

Well we've never tried democracy without a monetary system, so we don't really know. Might work better without it.

As for your last point, interesting a similar argument could be laid against capitalism. You cannot not participate, as capitalism in general relies on private ownership of property - and since all property has basically been apropriated, non particupation is practically impossible. Either you're free by work and ownership - or you starve.

You mean a the free trade system that pilgrims and native indians did? That could be good. It would highlight people's specialties and talents.

 

Lol. 

  • Like 1

"Good thing I don't heal my characters or they'd be really hurt." Is not something I should ever be thinking.

 

I use blue text when I'm being sarcastic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

like its matter, what matter is if information provided was true or not and if it was used or not

I'm the enemy, 'cause I like to think, I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech, and freedom of choice. I'm the kinda guy that likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecue ribs with the side-order of gravy fries?" I want high cholesterol! I wanna eat bacon, and butter, and buckets of cheese, okay?! I wanna smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section! I wanna run naked through the street, with green Jell-O all over my body, reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly may feel the need to, okay, pal? I've SEEN the future. Do you know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiene"

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really care all that much, I just think it's funny that Donny Jr just tweeted it out and Trump's getting **** over e-mails after all this whining about Hillary's e-mails. (I'm not a Hillary supporter either.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was meeting for a drink with my friend from UK and he asked an interesting question in regards to "Russian interference".

Why are Dems so invested in proving Trump was colluding with Russia which seems like a lot of chore, when they could with ease put the "colluding with foreign power" on Trump by pointing out Nigel Farage. Mr. Farage was an UK politician and member of EU parliment to boot and he was practically a member of Trump campaign.

Why this collusion doesn't count?

Was Nigel Farage a part of the UK government at the time?

"Good thing I don't heal my characters or they'd be really hurt." Is not something I should ever be thinking.

 

I use blue text when I'm being sarcastic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, colluding with somebody that incompetent can only have hurt Trump. He can collude with manual breathers all he wants. :D

I'm no expert on Nigel, but wasn't his primary political goal to achieve Brexit?

"Good thing I don't heal my characters or they'd be really hurt." Is not something I should ever be thinking.

 

I use blue text when I'm being sarcastic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I suppose he's proven a very competent liar.

 

(Also, his father's fortune and America's lack of education and subsequent obsession with reality TV stars made him a billionaire and US president respectively.)

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear, is Mr Trump in a bit of hot water because of some e-mails? Finger lickin' good, this. :lol:

Hmm doubt it. His sons sure are idiots though. But this whole thing is good as ig does wind Trump up a bit, so there's still some good.

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was meeting for a drink with my friend from UK and he asked an interesting question in regards to "Russian interference".

Why are Dems so invested in proving Trump was colluding with Russia which seems like a lot of chore, when they could with ease put the "colluding with foreign power" on Trump by pointing out Nigel Farage. Mr. Farage was an UK politician and member of EU parliment to boot and he was practically a member of Trump campaign.

Why this collusion doesn't count?

Because the Russia collusion is a better story obviously.  What I'm worried about is not the Trump campaign meeting with Russians, that's normal, it's their inexperience and mistrust of the State Department and intelligence services. It leaves them vulnerable. 

  • Like 1

Na na  na na  na na  ...

greg358 from Darksouls 3 PVP is a CHEATER.

That is all.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yeah, I suppose he's proven a very competent liar.

 

(Also, his father's fortune and America's lack of education and subsequent obsession with reality TV stars made him a billionaire and US president respectively.)

Sure, sure. But Hillary Clinton achieved everything by herself with heroic struggle :D

 

I don't really care all that much, I just think it's funny that Donny Jr just tweeted it out and Trump's getting **** over e-mails after all this whining about Hillary's e-mails. >>>>>(I'm not a Hillary supporter either.)

Hillary was a charisma black-hole with a campaign that was all about how stupid the opponents were and not what she wanted for the country*. In fact, I take back what I said. The dems providing Hillary as a candidate despite her lack of voter support is what got Trump the presidency. The fact that such an unsympathetic coorporate stooge managed to go toe to toe with and got the popular vote over Trump speaks volumes to me, but fair enough.

 

EDIT: *I mean, seriously? "I'm with her."? Even her tagline was about her getting support and help from the voters, not telling the voters she could mean something for them. What happened to the enthousiastic go-getter attitude of "Yes we can!"? It's no wonder her ****ty campaign lost to "Make America Great Again" patriotic pandering. When your whole campaign is "vote for me or you get the other guy" you'll never get people passionate, only fearful and despondent.

 

Grumble grumble stupid dem's giving Trump an easy win grumble...

Edited by TrueNeutral
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I was meeting for a drink with my friend from UK and he asked an interesting question in regards to "Russian interference".

Why are Dems so invested in proving Trump was colluding with Russia which seems like a lot of chore, when they could with ease put the "colluding with foreign power" on Trump by pointing out Nigel Farage. Mr. Farage was an UK politician and member of EU parliment to boot and he was practically a member of Trump campaign.

Why this collusion doesn't count?

Was Nigel Farage a part of the UK government at the time?

 

 

He was (still is) an MEP. I doubt being an actual member of the government really matters though, if Zhirinovsky or Zyuganov met with Trump it would still 'count' even though they aren't part of the Russian government, one suspects.

 

I do sometimes wonder what the response would have been if old Yanukovich in Ukraine had thrown McCain and Graham into jail for interfering in Ukrainian politics when they were there encouraging the Maidan. Not, one suspects, that they should not have been interfering in another county's politics and deserved everything they got.

 

Lawyer lady has nothing to do with the Russian Gov anyway, she just claimed she did so she could get another subject completely raised with a Trump- adoption; probably some Russian who had been farming out babies for americans splashing cash in an attempt to get the Magnitsky Bill repealed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was meeting for a drink with my friend from UK and he asked an interesting question in regards to "Russian interference".

Why are Dems so invested in proving Trump was colluding with Russia which seems like a lot of chore, when they could with ease put the "colluding with foreign power" on Trump by pointing out Nigel Farage. Mr. Farage was an UK politician and member of EU parliment to boot and he was practically a member of Trump campaign.

Why this collusion doesn't count?

 

That was out in the open and they had similar platforms.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I was meeting for a drink with my friend from UK and he asked an interesting question in regards to "Russian interference".

Why are Dems so invested in proving Trump was colluding with Russia which seems like a lot of chore, when they could with ease put the "colluding with foreign power" on Trump by pointing out Nigel Farage. Mr. Farage was an UK politician and member of EU parliment to boot and he was practically a member of Trump campaign.

Why this collusion doesn't count?

 

That was out in the open and they had similar platforms.

 

And what that has to do with anything? It's not collusion if it's out in the open? Is the foreign power ok if the platform is similar?

I'm confused  :blink:

 

 

People all around the globe endorsed Obama publicly when he ran for office. The accusations in relation to Russia go deeper. Involving funds, secrecy, mutual profiteering prospects through real-estate policy, throwing FUD with respect to Clinton. As much as I dislike Farage, I don't see how him speaking at a rally is colluding.

 

"It's not collusion if it's out in the open?" -- I don't normally throw dictionary definitions at people but I guess this is when one would do so.

 

col·lude

verb
gerund or present participle: colluding
  1. come to a secret understanding for a harmful purpose; conspire.
    "university leaders colluded in price-rigging"
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I was meeting for a drink with my friend from UK and he asked an interesting question in regards to "Russian interference".

Why are Dems so invested in proving Trump was colluding with Russia which seems like a lot of chore, when they could with ease put the "colluding with foreign power" on Trump by pointing out Nigel Farage. Mr. Farage was an UK politician and member of EU parliment to boot and he was practically a member of Trump campaign.

Why this collusion doesn't count?

 

That was out in the open and they had similar platforms.

 

It's not collusion if it's out in the open? 

 

 

...

 

uh.

 

...

 

why bother?

 

HA! Good Fun!

  • Like 2

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone saying 'hey, I like you! I endorse you!' isn't collusion, it's equivalent to saying 'Im a fan of your's, good luck!'. There's nothing material about it or anything of value. Nobody (well, besides some Bernie supporters maybe) complained when other leaders got behind Clinton, nobody complained about Farage and Geert Wilders supporting Trump either. Most of the time though, they generally stay out of it.

 

If people feel like that is collusion in the 'please butt out' sense, fine, but that's not the legal definition.

Edited by smjjames
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...