@SD: How so?
@ILN: I was referring to Poland, Hungary, and Bulgaria; not Russia, Ukraine, and Lithuania. I should have made that more clear.

No problem.

"Sybyvl, I believe in the politics of national interest not moral diplomacy. Diplomacy based on human rights and the realities of national interest rarely coincide. We are straying away from the economic question though."

I believe in national interest and moral politics. I do not think we differ very much.

how was it the point i wanted to make? my point is people have different abilities, but that these abilities do have SOMETHING to do with accidents of birth, namely natural talent, whatever form that takes, and that you shouldn't be rewarded for that.

What is the alternative, then? Communism?

my point isn't to suggest an alternative system (at least not here, in this thread, right now), my point is just what I said.

yes they should be awarded for that!!

so you think it is fair that someone has a better standard of life because of luck?

Lol are you guys actually having a debate with him?

THIS IS SBYVL. YOU CAN'T DEBATE HIM. HE'S TOO STUPID!

if someone is born naturally talented as you say, yes it is fair for them to have a higher standard of life if they manifest the talent and work with it, if they have the talent but ignore it, or don't use it, then they wont get awarded. simple as that.

lmao bo_sox

HITLER WAS A FASCIST COMMUNIST! REMEMBER IT FOREVER!

Bo sox is an expert on stupid? I would admit he is intimately familiar with being stupid, but not an expert on stupidity.

Bro, I am smart enough to know that fascist and communist are OPPOSITES.

I'm also smart enough to know that SBYVL SAID "HUMOUR" AND HE OBVIOUSLY ISN'T AN AMERICAN BUT A MASSIVE TROLL AND HE'S BEEN EXPOSED

Bo_sox is an expert on trolls? I would admit he is intimately familiar with being a troll, but not an expert on trolls.

Emac: are you seriously siding with Sbyvl? Are you aware of what happens when you do such a thing? Only enemies of America (or any country you use this plan on for that matter) would support it, unless they are really stupid. He thinks everybody is richer if you ruin import, export and make a dollar deflate.

Everybody with brains knows that inflation stimulates trade and deflation stimulates nothing. Trade needs to be stimulated, doing nothing causes any crisis, not like we're really in a crisis now I'd say. Not going to debate that though.

Emac, do you have an off button?

So did we decide what to do about those natural resources we don't have in the United States that will be prohibitively expensive with tariffs?

Steephie you can read my posts to see what I posted in this thread. Why are you trying to isolate sbyvl or get people to gang up on him? Are you a kid? Can't you develop logical arguments to contradict what he posts?

Did we decide what to do with the energy needed the US can't produce for itself as of now? You can't buy it, you can't produce it.

Well if we're discussing batshit insane policies, we might as well assume he plans for USA to carry out its manifest destiny goals on Canada and take over the Alberta Oil Sands.

Emac: "Steephie you can read my posts to see what I posted in this thread. Why are you trying to isolate sbyvl or get people to gang up on him? Are you a kid? Can't you develop logical arguments to contradict what he posts?"

Read: "Everybody with brains knows that inflation stimulates trade and deflation stimulates nothing. Trade needs to be stimulated, doing nothing causes any crisis, not like we're really in a crisis now I'd say. Not going to debate that though."

That's exactly what I said in the post you seem to be complaining about. Just because you can't find them doesn't mean I'm not posting logical arguments. Sbyvl hasn't posted a logical argument yet. All he can say is that ruining trade and currency stimulates the economy. Deflation means no one invests because you earn more by waiting for the money to become worth more, meaning nothing is produced. Tariffs mean no import.

Steephie, you have a lot of inaccurate assumption regarding who I was posting to and what I was posting about. It sure wasn't you.

Since you took the time to bring your post up right here and now I'll give you my view on it. Your statement "inflation stimulates trade" doesn't make sense. Hyper-inflation in the 1920's in Germany didn't stimulate trade. You say deflation doesn't stimulate anything which also doesn't make sense. From 1865-1900 prices of consumer goods in the United States constantly went down for decades in a row (deflation) because of America's massive industralization. The economy boomed and the standard of living doubled. You make broad all encompanssing claims I can't agree with.

Emac, deflation is not a decrease in the price of goods. Deflation is an increase in the value of the dollar. Next time actually look up a definition before you write about it.

I don't agree with 2WL on a lot, but hes right on the money (if you pardon the pun) on why deflation is bad idea. Not just on this post, but on his previous posts as well

Emac ignores me and goes for low hanging fruit.

I'm not talking about hyper-inflation. I'm talking about inflation. In order from good to bad for economy IMO: inflation, deflation, hyper-inflation, hyper-deflation.

Sbyvl wants hyper-deflation while America has inflation. That's as bad as an economic plan can get.

And like mentioned by fasces what you call deflation isn't deflation, and at that time there was inflation, same as almost always.

No 2nd White Line you are wrong. They are both deflation. Pull your head out of your ass before you post shit for brains.

A standard definition of deflation- deflation is a decrease in the general price level of goods and services.

What kind of stupid fuck are you 2nd W?