I asked them to send mine to Nigee so he could afford to subscribe to a new media outlet.

dont fuck with the wrong people, i guess

One day Nigee will realize that not every American has identical political beliefs.

One day.

dreams, got to have them

Why do Nigee's threads always feel like they're less about being outraged and more about his love for taunting Americans en toto?

Because that's what they are.

"I asked them to send mine to Nigee so he could afford to subscribe to a new media outlet."

Nigee's a born Imperialist he can't help but read the BBC Empire service.

Disclaimer: Nigee, we love you man.

Oh. Okay. Putin doesn't love you, the rest of us do.

To be fair, I only love ssoren.

The crazy thing about Gaza, they spent all those billions destroying it, and now they are raising billions to re-build it .... and this is why capitalism is unsustainable, because what do we do to keep our arms industry in business, this video is what we do, eventually the credit card of govt debt will be cut up and payment will be demanded and china will ask, what you done with all that money we lent you?
Anyway, why does the US (the most successful economy ever in the history of the world bar none) need to borrow from the Communist Chinese, mark my words, one day we'll all be speaking Mandarin .... am I right or am I Wong?
You ever get the feeling that the country that laughs last lasts loudest.....

laughs last laughs loudest.....

putin, no one blames you, and i completely understand

Nigee tries to turn his American trolling thread into something more insightful (Add China!), good job old sport. Hip Hip Cheerio.

Except we're not 'borrowing money from the Chinese'. The Chinese gives us lots of consumer products and in exchange they get US reserves that they can only use in so many ways, so they put them in debt securities. In effect all the Chinese have are a bunch of savings accounts with the US Federal Reserve. The money isn't in China.

Hey you know what prevents writing cliches wrong? Not writing cliches.

Why not, all this clown does is riff on false American clichés, glad to join the club.

Something that always struck me as funny. The advantage of trade generally is when you buy things foreign businesses get your countries currency, meaning they will tend to buy from your country and so the whole thing forms a nice cycle. With US dollars, since they are often collected by other countries as a reserve currency, can actually be traded directly between foreign countries with no money flowing back to the U.S., disadvantage of being a quasi-global currency, or am I overlooking something?

Once again, Putin is correct on international trade. Frankly I'm a bit surprised though, since that angle of approach to foreign exchange is usually only taught to economics students.

^^Meaning there are a variety of different angles he could've taken to say the same thing he ended up saying, and he just happened to pick the econ one.

ITT: Putin, Santa, Eden, ssorenn and bo agreed on something

shhhhh, the only thing i agree, is that Putin loves me

Santa - look at the video, you may think that is a troll but sadly Tiger that is real life but I suppose it is not in your neighbourhood and they are Arabs so why would you care, if a factual post on the internet is trolling...... how do you describe the massacre of over 2000 innocent people, is it a troll or the truth you don't want to deal with?

Will you consider holding a political conversation in good faith? Seems like everything is an attempt at a gotcha moment. I'm convinced you're more intelligent than that, Nigee. C'mon, man.

TIL Eden likes to refer to himself in the third person

"With US dollars, since they are often collected by other countries as a reserve currency, can actually be traded directly between foreign countries with no money flowing back to the U.S., disadvantage of being a quasi-global currency, or am I overlooking something?"

Dollar reserves must be invested in US assets. Having the dollar as the main reserve currency is a *huge* advantage for the United States. It is able to run up massive trade deficits with no consequences for the dollar, in fact the dollar may even strengthen as other countries hold dollars to prevent speculative attacks on their own currencies. Meanwhile, the fact that other countries must invest in US assets means that the US is able to gain a massive capital account surplus. The US never has to worry about a balance of payments 'crisis'. Furthermore, anything traded in dollars is de facto a US asset. This fact has allowed the US government to wage economic war on anybody that resists their dominance (see poor old BNP Paribas, Iran).

"Frankly I'm a bit surprised though, since that angle of approach to foreign exchange is usually only taught to economics students."

That was the way it was explained by Walter Mosler, who I think explains it the clearest of anyone, even if you don't agree with his opinions.

Prouder than the members of Hamas, who had millions of dollars that could have gone towards building infrastructure and helping the citizens, but blew it on underground tunnels built by enslaved children, all so they could pick a fight they had no chance of winning.

"not every American has identical political beliefs."

This is pretty hard to believe.

Considering you have two parties which are more alike to each other than any comparable party in any other nation.

If there are people down there who have reasonable political beliefs, you'd think they'd be able to make themselves heard. Since they don't, it's logical to assume that substantially all Americans share the same shitty political beliefs.

Great to be an American.

A rich white American*

And, the problem is??????

Sorry Lando, but when a movement to challenge the established politics emerged in the US, you derided them as 'retarded'.

http://95.211.128.12/webdiplomacy/forum.php?threadID=777663&page-thread=11#threadPager

I'd have an easier time taking this seriously if people didn't go out of their way to alienate what remains of the active left in the United States.

It's interesting for you to bring that up. That is quite a while ago, and first of all I think my views on issues have changed quite a bit in that time.

I also remember quite specifically what prompted me to post that. I was really trying to be critical of how the protest was being run. Maybe it was just the media coverage but it all seemed like the protest was just really aimed at unfairness, rather than specific issues where their focus could have actually made more of an impact. I'm sure there were parts of it where there was some sort of manifesto being followed.

Unfortunately that leads into my second point, the number of people involved at these things was huge, and I guess that helped make any potential impact. But it just drive down the crowds of people who wanted to be there for the sake of being there, people who didn't have any concept of what they were protesting.

To me, these two points tie together, and that is what I was trying to be critical of regardless of how ineffective I was.

"That is quite a while ago"

It was not so long ago that you would have forgotten by now that the Occupy movemet occurred, and therefore absolved you from saying things like all Americans have the same opinions.

"and first of all I think my views on issues have changed quite a bit in that time. "

I can tell, and for that anyway I am glad.

"Maybe it was just the media coverage but it all seemed like the protest was just really aimed at unfairness, rather than specific issues where their focus could have actually made more of an impact."

Well I share your criticism in that I wished its goal had been less a 'listening campaign' and more about concrete objectives, but at the same time I think it served a productive purpose. The zeitgeist at the time was that all our economic problems could be solved by deficit reduction. That movement, at the very least, changed the consensus on that. It also signaled to the outside world, at least by the public statements by various mucky mucks, that there was discontent in the US.