And yeah, I get it...they have no sewage! There's traffic problems! Sure, every city has problems...especially in India. And honestly, they do get the sewage out via transportation, and could form a sewage system once it's profitably.
But how can you argue with the fact that so many people in India are eager to move there? It's obviously less of a shithole than all the cities that have a functional government in that country.
It's the same shit with Somalia...Somalia is a shithole, sure...but it's become LESS of a shithole since the government was all but dismantled. That's what people fail to look at...
There are no profitable sewage systems. Some Government is needed.
Pointing to shitholes like Somalia and parts of India and how they may be a little less shitty to live in than their neighbors with the same functioning government doesn't prove anything.
There will indeed need to be some sort of hybrid economy. Capitalism is all based on growth. If it can't grow, it implodes. There are only so many resources on this planet and eventually growth will stop.
Natural resources are commodities, the prices of which are held in check by supply and demand. Scarcity of resources is a check on resource depletion. As the supply lessens, price goes up until it becomes prohibitively expensive for that resource to be used in any profitable venture. The market is then forced to come up with a more viable alternative. We saw this when the scarcity of wood drove the market to respond with the industrial revolution in the 1800s. It will happen again with oil.
Great post and you sited one example among many. Often it is scarcity or depletion that force solutions or alternatives that are better than the original technology. Free market capitalism, with a good dose of rule by law and respect for private property- including Intellectual property, is the best way to consistently find solutions to depletion and scarcity.
CEPT THAT the population has doubled in my lifetime from 4 billion to 8 billion. You can't continue double the population every 40 years and expect to have resources to take care of even those in the richer countries. The raping of these resources at the direction of the World Bank has accelerating this even at a faster rate. The math doesn't add up. I get the whole necessity is the mother of invention argument. But the industrial revolution started here in the US and there was no shortage of wood at that time, here in the US. It wasn't until the 1980's where wood shortages became a problem due to over harvest and no replant.
You can't eat Iphones, cloud data or self driving cars. Unless there are magic bullets to be invented such AS huge advancements in energy efficiency and the ability to produce abundant food supplies in areas with little to no native water, the current system will implode upon itself.
That's exactly why America went from a new country to the most successful, with agriculture and natural resources, we could be self sustaining, and we were.
Then we added in freedom to do as you wish and invent whatever. And some government investment in infrastructure, including the hated post office.
Those all led to a formula of success.
And no @Sledog, no one of influence in America is proposing to be a socialist nation. And no entitlement spending doesn't dwarf military. You do realize that military spending is like 10 times that of food stamps, right? It's amazing how much of a dream world you live in.
Uh without the military to defeat the Huns and Japs and to exert our power and survive the Cold War there is nothing here but dust in the wind
Self supporting isn't enough. Exporting is needed. We are the breadbasket of the world.
Yeah and if a major world problem like that of world War 2 appears, we can re-open the conversation about raising the military budget and intervening. Building aircraft carriers the Pentagon says they don't need and doing needless wars like Iraq and Libya is not that
Venezuela's economic failing has almost nothing to do with the system of government and almost everything to do with the price of oil. That is what happens when your economy is tied to a single, volatile commodity.
So in that case wouldn't the populations about 30 other countries be crashin' stores for in food in border towns So are you goal tending for the shit show that is socialism. I remember breadlines helped bring down the mighty Soviet Union. And wow they had a socialistic eco system too.
Venezuela's economic failing has almost nothing to do with the system of government and almost everything to do with the price of oil. That is what happens when your economy is tied to a single, volatile commodity.
So in that case wouldn't the populations about 30 other countries be crashin' stores for in food in border towns So are you goal tending for the shit show that is socialism. I remember breadlines helped bring down the mighty Soviet Union. And wow they had a socialistic eco system too.
Why do you hate facts?
Countries like Saudi Arabia do have huge unemployment and will run out of cash for welfare if oil prices don't increase at which point they will be like Venezuela. Lots of OPEC countries are welfare states because when the government exploits natural resources for cash it goes back to the population. Since oil is about the only thing going on in many OPEC countries they do not have diversified economies and without oil the economic backbone crumbles. Without oil they'd all be shepherds but they have lost that so without oil jobs they have no jobs and without oil money the government isn't funded to carry them. You look at Venezuela as one end member where it has already collapsed, Saudi Arabia in the middle which has high unemployment and is depleting cash reserves and Norway on the other end (oil exporting but non-OPEC welfare state) which aside from having managed their oil fund well, has a much more diversified economy and is doing fine.
Now look at the socialist mecca of Houston where I live and with oil prices down unemployment has increased by 14% in the past year (although it is still a pretty modest absolute rate) and the housing market has tremendously slowed. Houston has a diversified economy much like Norway and has had unemployment from drop 4.3% to 4.9% vs Norway's 4.3% to 4.8%.
Any other questions about the reality of the world or would you just like keep playing pretend?
Venezuela's economic failing has almost nothing to do with the system of government and almost everything to do with the price of oil. That is what happens when your economy is tied to a single, volatile commodity.
So in that case wouldn't the populations about 30 other countries be crashin' stores for in food in border towns So are you goal tending for the shit show that is socialism. I remember breadlines helped bring down the mighty Soviet Union. And wow they had a socialistic eco system too.
Why do you hate facts?
Countries like Saudi Arabia do have huge unemployment and will run out of cash for welfare if oil prices don't increase at which point they will be like Venezuela. Lots of OPEC countries are welfare states because when the government exploits natural resources for cash it goes back to the population. Since oil is about the only thing going on in many OPEC countries they do not have diversified economies and without oil the economic backbone crumbles. Without oil they'd all be shepherds but they have lost that so without oil jobs they have no jobs and without oil money the government isn't funded to carry them. You look at Venezuela as one end member where it has already collapsed, Saudi Arabia in the middle which has high unemployment and is depleting cash reserves and Norway on the other end (oil exporting but non-OPEC welfare state) which aside from having managed their oil fund well, has a much more diversified economy and is doing fine.
Now look at the socialist mecca of Houston where I live and with oil prices down unemployment has increased by 14% in the past year (although it is still a pretty modest absolute rate) and the housing market has tremendously slowed. Houston has a diversified economy much like Norway and has had unemployment from drop 4.3% to 4.9% vs Norway's 4.3% to 4.8%.
Any other questions about the reality of the world or would you just like keep playing pretend?
And yeah, I get it...they have no sewage! There's traffic problems! Sure, every city has problems...especially in India. And honestly, they do get the sewage out via transportation, and could form a sewage system once it's profitably.
But how can you argue with the fact that so many people in India are eager to move there? It's obviously less of a shithole than all the cities that have a functional government in that country.
It's the same shit with Somalia...Somalia is a shithole, sure...but it's become LESS of a shithole since the government was all but dismantled. That's what people fail to look at...
There are no profitable sewage systems. Some Government is needed.
Pointing to shitholes like Somalia and parts of India and how they may be a little less shitty to live in than their neighbors with the same functioning government doesn't prove anything.
There will indeed need to be some sort of hybrid economy. Capitalism is all based on growth. If it can't grow, it implodes. There are only so many resources on this planet and eventually growth will stop.
Natural resources are commodities, the prices of which are held in check by supply and demand. Scarcity of resources is a check on resource depletion. As the supply lessens, price goes up until it becomes prohibitively expensive for that resource to be used in any profitable venture. The market is then forced to come up with a more viable alternative. We saw this when the scarcity of wood drove the market to respond with the industrial revolution in the 1800s. It will happen again with oil.
Great post and you sited one example among many. Often it is scarcity or depletion that force solutions or alternatives that are better than the original technology. Free market capitalism, with a good dose of rule by law and respect for private property- including Intellectual property, is the best way to consistently find solutions to depletion and scarcity.
CEPT THAT the population has doubled in my lifetime from 4 billion to 8 billion. You can't continue double the population every 40 years and expect to have resources to take care of even those in the richer countries. The raping of these resources at the direction of the World Bank has accelerating this even at a faster rate. The math doesn't add up. I get the whole necessity is the mother of invention argument. But the industrial revolution started here in the US and there was no shortage of wood at that time, here in the US. It wasn't until the 1980's where wood shortages became a problem due to over harvest and no replant.
You can't eat Iphones, cloud data or self driving cars. Unless there are magic bullets to be invented such AS huge advancements in energy efficiency and the ability to produce abundant food supplies in areas with little to no native water, the current system will implode upon itself and erupt in a ball of fire.
The funniest part of this thread is witnessing Hondo's misguidance on the role of government. He thinks government is a bulwark against corporations, instead of a partner in crime. The worse a corporation does, the more likely it is to have government partners on the take at all levels, letting it do as it pleases, for a price. "Government is needed to protect us from corporations." Right. Good luck with that, kid. Christ.
The funniest part of this thread is witnessing Hondo's misguidance on the role of government. He thinks government is a bulwark against corporations, instead of a partner in crime. The worse a corporation does, the more likely it is to have government partners on the take at all levels, letting it do as it pleases, for a price. "Government is needed to protect us from corporations." Right. Good luck with that, kid. Christ.
See Trump’s bailouts by the state of New Jersey as a perfect example of this.
Venezuela's economic failing has almost nothing to do with the system of government and almost everything to do with the price of oil. That is what happens when your economy is tied to a single, volatile commodity.
So in that case wouldn't the populations about 30 other countries be crashin' stores for in food in border towns So are you goal tending for the shit show that is socialism. I remember breadlines helped bring down the mighty Soviet Union. And wow they had a socialistic eco system too.
And yeah, I get it...they have no sewage! There's traffic problems! Sure, every city has problems...especially in India. And honestly, they do get the sewage out via transportation, and could form a sewage system once it's profitably.
But how can you argue with the fact that so many people in India are eager to move there? It's obviously less of a shithole than all the cities that have a functional government in that country.
It's the same shit with Somalia...Somalia is a shithole, sure...but it's become LESS of a shithole since the government was all but dismantled. That's what people fail to look at...
There are no profitable sewage systems. Some Government is needed.
Pointing to shitholes like Somalia and parts of India and how they may be a little less shitty to live in than their neighbors with the same functioning government doesn't prove anything.
There will indeed need to be some sort of hybrid economy. Capitalism is all based on growth. If it can't grow, it implodes. There are only so many resources on this planet and eventually growth will stop.
Natural resources are commodities, the prices of which are held in check by supply and demand. Scarcity of resources is a check on resource depletion. As the supply lessens, price goes up until it becomes prohibitively expensive for that resource to be used in any profitable venture. The market is then forced to come up with a more viable alternative. We saw this when the scarcity of wood drove the market to respond with the industrial revolution in the 1800s. It will happen again with oil.
Great post and you sited one example among many. Often it is scarcity or depletion that force solutions or alternatives that are better than the original technology. Free market capitalism, with a good dose of rule by law and respect for private property- including Intellectual property, is the best way to consistently find solutions to depletion and scarcity.
CEPT THAT the population has doubled in my lifetime from 4 billion to 8 billion. You can't continue double the population every 40 years and expect to have resources to take care of even those in the richer countries. The raping of these resources at the direction of the World Bank has accelerating this even at a faster rate. The math doesn't add up. I get the whole necessity is the mother of invention argument. But the industrial revolution started here in the US and there was no shortage of wood at that time, here in the US. It wasn't until the 1980's where wood shortages became a problem due to over harvest and no replant.
You can't eat Iphones, cloud data or self driving cars. Unless there are magic bullets to be invented such AS huge advancements in energy efficiency and the ability to produce abundant food supplies in areas with little to no native water, the current system will implode upon itself.
That's exactly why America went from a new country to the most successful, with agriculture and natural resources, we could be self sustaining, and we were.
Then we added in freedom to do as you wish and invent whatever. And some government investment in infrastructure, including the hated post office.
Those all led to a formula of success.
And no @Sledog, no one of influence in America is proposing to be a socialist nation. And no entitlement spending doesn't dwarf military. You do realize that military spending is like 10 times that of food stamps, right? It's amazing how much of a dream world you live in.
Uh without the military to defeat the Huns and Japs and to exert our power and survive the Cold War there is nothing here but dust in the wind
Self supporting isn't enough. Exporting is needed. We are the breadbasket of the world.
Yeah and if a major world problem like that of world War 2 appears, we can re-open the conversation about raising the military budget and intervening. Building aircraft carriers the Pentagon says they don't need and doing needless wars like Iraq and Libya is not that
It would take to long to switch to war production. Aircraft carriers take years to build, things are a bit more sophisticated than in WWII. If you don't have it uoure not going to have time to build it.
Venezuela's economic failing has almost nothing to do with the system of government and almost everything to do with the price of oil. That is what happens when your economy is tied to a single, volatile commodity.
So in that case wouldn't the populations about 30 other countries be crashin' stores for in food in border towns So are you goal tending for the shit show that is socialism. I remember breadlines helped bring down the mighty Soviet Union. And wow they had a socialistic eco system too.
And yeah, I get it...they have no sewage! There's traffic problems! Sure, every city has problems...especially in India. And honestly, they do get the sewage out via transportation, and could form a sewage system once it's profitably.
But how can you argue with the fact that so many people in India are eager to move there? It's obviously less of a shithole than all the cities that have a functional government in that country.
It's the same shit with Somalia...Somalia is a shithole, sure...but it's become LESS of a shithole since the government was all but dismantled. That's what people fail to look at...
There are no profitable sewage systems. Some Government is needed.
Pointing to shitholes like Somalia and parts of India and how they may be a little less shitty to live in than their neighbors with the same functioning government doesn't prove anything.
There will indeed need to be some sort of hybrid economy. Capitalism is all based on growth. If it can't grow, it implodes. There are only so many resources on this planet and eventually growth will stop.
Natural resources are commodities, the prices of which are held in check by supply and demand. Scarcity of resources is a check on resource depletion. As the supply lessens, price goes up until it becomes prohibitively expensive for that resource to be used in any profitable venture. The market is then forced to come up with a more viable alternative. We saw this when the scarcity of wood drove the market to respond with the industrial revolution in the 1800s. It will happen again with oil.
Great post and you sited one example among many. Often it is scarcity or depletion that force solutions or alternatives that are better than the original technology. Free market capitalism, with a good dose of rule by law and respect for private property- including Intellectual property, is the best way to consistently find solutions to depletion and scarcity.
CEPT THAT the population has doubled in my lifetime from 4 billion to 8 billion. You can't continue double the population every 40 years and expect to have resources to take care of even those in the richer countries. The raping of these resources at the direction of the World Bank has accelerating this even at a faster rate. The math doesn't add up. I get the whole necessity is the mother of invention argument. But the industrial revolution started here in the US and there was no shortage of wood at that time, here in the US. It wasn't until the 1980's where wood shortages became a problem due to over harvest and no replant.
You can't eat Iphones, cloud data or self driving cars. Unless there are magic bullets to be invented such AS huge advancements in energy efficiency and the ability to produce abundant food supplies in areas with little to no native water, the current system will implode upon itself.
That's exactly why America went from a new country to the most successful, with agriculture and natural resources, we could be self sustaining, and we were.
Then we added in freedom to do as you wish and invent whatever. And some government investment in infrastructure, including the hated post office.
Those all led to a formula of success.
And no @Sledog, no one of influence in America is proposing to be a socialist nation. And no entitlement spending doesn't dwarf military. You do realize that military spending is like 10 times that of food stamps, right? It's amazing how much of a dream world you live in.
Uh without the military to defeat the Huns and Japs and to exert our power and survive the Cold War there is nothing here but dust in the wind
Self supporting isn't enough. Exporting is needed. We are the breadbasket of the world.
Yeah and if a major world problem like that of world War 2 appears, we can re-open the conversation about raising the military budget and intervening. Building aircraft carriers the Pentagon says they don't need and doing needless wars like Iraq and Libya is not that
It would take to long to switch to war production. Aircraft carriers take years to build, things are a bit more sophisticated than in WWII. If you don't have it uoure not going to have time to build it.
Huh? We have more in service right now and all other countries combined.
The funniest part of this thread is witnessing Hondo's misguidance on the role of government. He thinks government is a bulwark against corporations, instead of a partner in crime. The worse a corporation does, the more likely it is to have government partners on the take at all levels, letting it do as it pleases, for a price. "Government is needed to protect us from corporations." Right. Good luck with that, kid. Christ.
See Trump’s bailouts by the state of New Jersey as a perfect example of this.
Venezuela's economic failing has almost nothing to do with the system of government and almost everything to do with the price of oil. That is what happens when your economy is tied to a single, volatile commodity.
So in that case wouldn't the populations about 30 other countries be crashin' stores for in food in border towns So are you goal tending for the shit show that is socialism. I remember breadlines helped bring down the mighty Soviet Union. And wow they had a socialistic eco system too.
And yeah, I get it...they have no sewage! There's traffic problems! Sure, every city has problems...especially in India. And honestly, they do get the sewage out via transportation, and could form a sewage system once it's profitably.
But how can you argue with the fact that so many people in India are eager to move there? It's obviously less of a shithole than all the cities that have a functional government in that country.
It's the same shit with Somalia...Somalia is a shithole, sure...but it's become LESS of a shithole since the government was all but dismantled. That's what people fail to look at...
There are no profitable sewage systems. Some Government is needed.
Pointing to shitholes like Somalia and parts of India and how they may be a little less shitty to live in than their neighbors with the same functioning government doesn't prove anything.
There will indeed need to be some sort of hybrid economy. Capitalism is all based on growth. If it can't grow, it implodes. There are only so many resources on this planet and eventually growth will stop.
Natural resources are commodities, the prices of which are held in check by supply and demand. Scarcity of resources is a check on resource depletion. As the supply lessens, price goes up until it becomes prohibitively expensive for that resource to be used in any profitable venture. The market is then forced to come up with a more viable alternative. We saw this when the scarcity of wood drove the market to respond with the industrial revolution in the 1800s. It will happen again with oil.
Great post and you sited one example among many. Often it is scarcity or depletion that force solutions or alternatives that are better than the original technology. Free market capitalism, with a good dose of rule by law and respect for private property- including Intellectual property, is the best way to consistently find solutions to depletion and scarcity.
CEPT THAT the population has doubled in my lifetime from 4 billion to 8 billion. You can't continue double the population every 40 years and expect to have resources to take care of even those in the richer countries. The raping of these resources at the direction of the World Bank has accelerating this even at a faster rate. The math doesn't add up. I get the whole necessity is the mother of invention argument. But the industrial revolution started here in the US and there was no shortage of wood at that time, here in the US. It wasn't until the 1980's where wood shortages became a problem due to over harvest and no replant.
You can't eat Iphones, cloud data or self driving cars. Unless there are magic bullets to be invented such AS huge advancements in energy efficiency and the ability to produce abundant food supplies in areas with little to no native water, the current system will implode upon itself.
That's exactly why America went from a new country to the most successful, with agriculture and natural resources, we could be self sustaining, and we were.
Then we added in freedom to do as you wish and invent whatever. And some government investment in infrastructure, including the hated post office.
Those all led to a formula of success.
And no @Sledog, no one of influence in America is proposing to be a socialist nation. And no entitlement spending doesn't dwarf military. You do realize that military spending is like 10 times that of food stamps, right? It's amazing how much of a dream world you live in.
Uh without the military to defeat the Huns and Japs and to exert our power and survive the Cold War there is nothing here but dust in the wind
Self supporting isn't enough. Exporting is needed. We are the breadbasket of the world.
Yeah and if a major world problem like that of world War 2 appears, we can re-open the conversation about raising the military budget and intervening. Building aircraft carriers the Pentagon says they don't need and doing needless wars like Iraq and Libya is not that
It would take to long to switch to war production. Aircraft carriers take years to build, things are a bit more sophisticated than in WWII. If you don't have it uoure not going to have time to build it.
Huh? We have more in service right now and all other countries combined.
So what we have more. That's why we're the United States and at the mercy of no country. Walk softly and carry a big stick. Teddy had it right. Unfortunately we're currently being run by a fucking sissy.
Venezuela's economic failing has almost nothing to do with the system of government and almost everything to do with the price of oil. That is what happens when your economy is tied to a single, volatile commodity.
So in that case wouldn't the populations about 30 other countries be crashin' stores for in food in border towns So are you goal tending for the shit show that is socialism. I remember breadlines helped bring down the mighty Soviet Union. And wow they had a socialistic eco system too.
Why do you hate facts?
Countries like Saudi Arabia do have huge unemployment and will run out of cash for welfare if oil prices don't increase at which point they will be like Venezuela. Lots of OPEC countries are welfare states because when the government exploits natural resources for cash it goes back to the population. Since oil is about the only thing going on in many OPEC countries they do not have diversified economies and without oil the economic backbone crumbles. Without oil they'd all be shepherds but they have lost that so without oil jobs they have no jobs and without oil money the government isn't funded to carry them. You look at Venezuela as one end member where it has already collapsed, Saudi Arabia in the middle which has high unemployment and is depleting cash reserves and Norway on the other end (oil exporting but non-OPEC welfare state) which aside from having managed their oil fund well, has a much more diversified economy and is doing fine.
Now look at the socialist mecca of Houston where I live and with oil prices down unemployment has increased by 14% in the past year (although it is still a pretty modest absolute rate) and the housing market has tremendously slowed. Houston has a diversified economy much like Norway and has had unemployment from drop 4.3% to 4.9% vs Norway's 4.3% to 4.8%.
Any other questions about the reality of the world or would you just like keep playing pretend?
Uh I hit the point made above that "Venezuela's economic failing has almost nothing to do with the system of government and almost everything to do with the price of oil.". I think you took my post out of context. I was hitting Venezuela situation in particular and those countries you mentioned are not capitalistic states with diversified economies. I live in Austin Tx which has a very diversified eco in which oil and gas is a part and we are fine. So maybe having a (shitty socialistic eco system AND being a 1 commodity eco) is really the worst of both worlds.
And no, no other question as I think I can answer them just fine.
Venezuela's economic failing has almost nothing to do with the system of government and almost everything to do with the price of oil. That is what happens when your economy is tied to a single, volatile commodity.
So in that case wouldn't the populations about 30 other countries be crashin' stores for in food in border towns So are you goal tending for the shit show that is socialism. I remember breadlines helped bring down the mighty Soviet Union. And wow they had a socialistic eco system too.
Why do you hate facts?
Countries like Saudi Arabia do have huge unemployment and will run out of cash for welfare if oil prices don't increase at which point they will be like Venezuela. Lots of OPEC countries are welfare states because when the government exploits natural resources for cash it goes back to the population. Since oil is about the only thing going on in many OPEC countries they do not have diversified economies and without oil the economic backbone crumbles. Without oil they'd all be shepherds but they have lost that so without oil jobs they have no jobs and without oil money the government isn't funded to carry them. You look at Venezuela as one end member where it has already collapsed, Saudi Arabia in the middle which has high unemployment and is depleting cash reserves and Norway on the other end (oil exporting but non-OPEC welfare state) which aside from having managed their oil fund well, has a much more diversified economy and is doing fine.
Now look at the socialist mecca of Houston where I live and with oil prices down unemployment has increased by 14% in the past year (although it is still a pretty modest absolute rate) and the housing market has tremendously slowed. Houston has a diversified economy much like Norway and has had unemployment from drop 4.3% to 4.9% vs Norway's 4.3% to 4.8%.
Any other questions about the reality of the world or would you just like keep playing pretend?
Uh I hit the point made above that "Venezuela's economic failing has almost nothing to do with the system of government and almost everything to do with the price of oil.". I think you took my post out of context. I was hitting Venezuela situation in particular and those countries you mentioned are not capitalistic states with diversified economies. I live in Austin Tx which has a very diversified eco in which oil and gas is a part and we are fine. So maybe having a (shitty socialistic eco system AND being a 1 commodity eco) is really the worst of both worlds.
And no, no other question as I think I can answer them just fine.
My point about Houston (the socialism thing being sarcasm) was that capitalistic economies are hurt by a dependence on a single commodity. Since Houston and Norway are more diversified than Venezuela and Saudi Arabia they are in better position, irrespective of the form of government/economic system in play. My point about Venezuela's collapse is that if they were fully capitalistic and still entirely dependent on oil they would still be fucked and that the collapse is not because they are socialistic. The merits, or lack thereof, of socialism are entirely unrelated to my thesis.
Venezuela's economic failing has almost nothing to do with the system of government and almost everything to do with the price of oil. That is what happens when your economy is tied to a single, volatile commodity.
So in that case wouldn't the populations about 30 other countries be crashin' stores for in food in border towns So are you goal tending for the shit show that is socialism. I remember breadlines helped bring down the mighty Soviet Union. And wow they had a socialistic eco system too.
And yeah, I get it...they have no sewage! There's traffic problems! Sure, every city has problems...especially in India. And honestly, they do get the sewage out via transportation, and could form a sewage system once it's profitably.
But how can you argue with the fact that so many people in India are eager to move there? It's obviously less of a shithole than all the cities that have a functional government in that country.
It's the same shit with Somalia...Somalia is a shithole, sure...but it's become LESS of a shithole since the government was all but dismantled. That's what people fail to look at...
There are no profitable sewage systems. Some Government is needed.
Pointing to shitholes like Somalia and parts of India and how they may be a little less shitty to live in than their neighbors with the same functioning government doesn't prove anything.
There will indeed need to be some sort of hybrid economy. Capitalism is all based on growth. If it can't grow, it implodes. There are only so many resources on this planet and eventually growth will stop.
Natural resources are commodities, the prices of which are held in check by supply and demand. Scarcity of resources is a check on resource depletion. As the supply lessens, price goes up until it becomes prohibitively expensive for that resource to be used in any profitable venture. The market is then forced to come up with a more viable alternative. We saw this when the scarcity of wood drove the market to respond with the industrial revolution in the 1800s. It will happen again with oil.
Great post and you sited one example among many. Often it is scarcity or depletion that force solutions or alternatives that are better than the original technology. Free market capitalism, with a good dose of rule by law and respect for private property- including Intellectual property, is the best way to consistently find solutions to depletion and scarcity.
CEPT THAT the population has doubled in my lifetime from 4 billion to 8 billion. You can't continue double the population every 40 years and expect to have resources to take care of even those in the richer countries. The raping of these resources at the direction of the World Bank has accelerating this even at a faster rate. The math doesn't add up. I get the whole necessity is the mother of invention argument. But the industrial revolution started here in the US and there was no shortage of wood at that time, here in the US. It wasn't until the 1980's where wood shortages became a problem due to over harvest and no replant.
You can't eat Iphones, cloud data or self driving cars. Unless there are magic bullets to be invented such AS huge advancements in energy efficiency and the ability to produce abundant food supplies in areas with little to no native water, the current system will implode upon itself.
That's exactly why America went from a new country to the most successful, with agriculture and natural resources, we could be self sustaining, and we were.
Then we added in freedom to do as you wish and invent whatever. And some government investment in infrastructure, including the hated post office.
Those all led to a formula of success.
And no @Sledog, no one of influence in America is proposing to be a socialist nation. And no entitlement spending doesn't dwarf military. You do realize that military spending is like 10 times that of food stamps, right? It's amazing how much of a dream world you live in.
Uh without the military to defeat the Huns and Japs and to exert our power and survive the Cold War there is nothing here but dust in the wind
Self supporting isn't enough. Exporting is needed. We are the breadbasket of the world.
Yeah and if a major world problem like that of world War 2 appears, we can re-open the conversation about raising the military budget and intervening. Building aircraft carriers the Pentagon says they don't need and doing needless wars like Iraq and Libya is not that
It would take to long to switch to war production. Aircraft carriers take years to build, things are a bit more sophisticated than in WWII. If you don't have it uoure not going to have time to build it.
Huh? We have more in service right now and all other countries combined.
So what we have more. That's why we're the United States and at the mercy of no country. Walk softly and carry a big stick. Teddy had it right. Unfortunately we're currently being run by a fucking sissy.
Obama has done interventions in 7 different countries in 8 years. He's currently bombing the fuck out of isis, droning all over the place, and funding the Saudi coalition in yemen. He's still in Afghanistan. But I get it, he's a sissy because he didn't ground invade Syria, stay in Iraq for 50 years and nuke russia
Comments
The next two biggest are insurance programs that the majority of the people favor and pay into and self fund because people pay into it.
As the NY Times reported today, red states depend more on fed spending than blue states due.
In conclusion, suck a dick.
Obviously we need to kill more socialist/commies they seem to be migrating and trying to turn the USA into a 3rd world shit show.
Building aircraft carriers the Pentagon says they don't need and doing needless wars like Iraq and Libya is not that
Countries like Saudi Arabia do have huge unemployment and will run out of cash for welfare if oil prices don't increase at which point they will be like Venezuela. Lots of OPEC countries are welfare states because when the government exploits natural resources for cash it goes back to the population. Since oil is about the only thing going on in many OPEC countries they do not have diversified economies and without oil the economic backbone crumbles. Without oil they'd all be shepherds but they have lost that so without oil jobs they have no jobs and without oil money the government isn't funded to carry them. You look at Venezuela as one end member where it has already collapsed, Saudi Arabia in the middle which has high unemployment and is depleting cash reserves and Norway on the other end (oil exporting but non-OPEC welfare state) which aside from having managed their oil fund well, has a much more diversified economy and is doing fine.
Now look at the socialist mecca of Houston where I live and with oil prices down unemployment has increased by 14% in the past year (although it is still a pretty modest absolute rate) and the housing market has tremendously slowed. Houston has a diversified economy much like Norway and has had unemployment from drop 4.3% to 4.9% vs Norway's 4.3% to 4.8%.
Any other questions about the reality of the world or would you just like keep playing pretend?
http://articles.philly.com/1990-08-22/news/25934025_1_donald-trump-trump-attorney-casino-commission
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/08/17/us/politics/trump-chris-christie-casinos.html
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_carriers_by_country
And no, no other question as I think I can answer them just fine.
He's still in Afghanistan. But I get it, he's a sissy because he didn't ground invade Syria, stay in Iraq for 50 years and nuke russia