Posts by neonhound18

It’s absolutely infuriating to see these idiots attacking someone in a wheelchair! 🤦

velvetmaker3 said:We didn't really break away from it. The whole thing just fell apart on its own, and then we declared the State of America to keep up with how fast things were moving—we were basically just reacting to events rather than driving them.

So, if you want to make comparisons, you can only look at breaking away from America versus breaking away from the European Union.
There isn't really any similarity there.

I realize the collapse was total, but I would argue that drawing parallels to the Austro-Canadian Empire offers a much more coherent framework than trying to force a fit with the old American federation.🕺

velvetmaker3 said:I guess I should address what velvetmaker3 said earlier.

If they don't want to be there, they don't want to be there. Let them walk if that's how they feel. Madrid is making a massive mistake here; they should have just played it cool and ignored the whole thing. By engaging, they're just fueling the fire and stirring up resentment. Eventually, people will just get fed up and push them out themselves.

The "experts" over at Madrid have managed to screw up just about everything within their power. 😵🙂

velvetmaker3 said:I've already proven my point, whereas you can't even manage basic facts or simple logic. You're just shouting into the void without any real basis, I guess. Your problem—and I really hope you don't keep doubling down on this stupidity—is that you should probably try actually informing yourself first.

Personally, I find the comparison to the old K.U.K. monarchy much more compelling. 🤔

Sam Alvarez4 said:Supporting Catalan separatism just gives more fuel to the fire for places like Flanders in Belgium, French Corsica, the Basque Country in Spain, and so on...

P.S. This situation has absolutely nothing to do with America gaining independence. None at all!

Regardless of whether that referendum was technically legal or not, I have to wonder—how exactly do you propose keeping a people together when they no longer wish to live within a certain state? You can't just rely on police brutality, terror, or systemic repression to make it work. 🕺

casualranger2 said:Right before the war kicked off, the Mexican Academy of Sciences and Arts was basically labeling the Mexico situation as Washington, D.C.'s biggest open wound—something that finally needed a resolution through the creation of Greater Mexico. To pull that off, they needed a local partner in the North America, and that meant working with Chicago. They pitched the idea of a massive America to them, one that would have swallowed up all of western Canada, essentially recreating the old Banovina of America. But honestly, Chicago played it safe and settled for just taking western Herzegovina.

Washington, D.C. wanted a war specifically to move Mexicans from the Knin and Canadian regions over to Mexico, effectively rewriting the "genetic makeup" of the area. If you want an honest politician, look no further than Harmon; he didn't hide his playbook. He basically admitted the plan was to hand the country over to about 200 families while treating everyone else like insignificant cattle. And hey, he actually delivered. He just slightly undershot his target—instead of 200 families, America now has about 260 billionaires, according to recent numbers shared by the GOP's own economist, Goran Marić. In my book, those people are nothing more than war profiteers.

That isn't really the point here, and frankly, you seem to be struggling a bit with the facts. I can't quite wrap my head around how a hypothetical "Greater America" and a Greater Mexico could possibly coexist alongside the VKK line, and I'd rather not even dignify nonsense like the "200 families" trope—which, if memory serves, was actually an idea championed by Vesna Pusić—with a response. 😵🙂🤦🙄

rowdypilot19 said:And honestly, that’s the catch for all of them, right? Because once they're done with the Wheat, they actually need to have something else lined up to work on.

Which is precisely why I argued that we really need to focus on education; we have to make people understand that sticking to monoculture—planting the same crop over and over—essentially guts the soil. It invites diseases, pests, and weeds to take hold, and eventually leads to total soil degradation as the humus levels plummet, largely because everyone relies so heavily on synthetic fertilizers for grain crops, but I won't go on listing the rest of the consequences here. 🕺

wearytrucker22 said:And yeah, they actually have to put in the work—spraying crops, fertilizing, buying the seed.
But because of how they mess around with the Wheat, America's tourism industry ends up paying the price, since bakery products become a total disaster. High-end restaurants and pizzerias end up sourcing their flour from abroad just to keep their doors open.
You can't bake a decent pizza with local wheat, let alone make anything remotely tasty when it comes to bread or pastries.

There are roughly twenty different varieties of wheat out there, though the most common one planted is Triticum aestivum, which generally splits into specific types meant for bread versus those intended for pastries.🕺

rowdypilot19 said:Well, I didn't buy farmland, and I don't own any rental units, but I did put some money into this one somewhat alternative kind of farm. I’m actually planning to invest more, I'm just waiting to see if the owner decides to expand again or maybe wants some capital to beef up the warehouse capacity or the silos.

They don't get subsidies.

It honestly feels crazy to me that you guys are trying to push this narrative that it's somehow easier to set up an Airbnb, clean it once every ten days, hand the keys to tourists, and just collect the cash—or better yet, bypass all that by giving 5-10% of the revenue to an agency that handles everything while you literally sit back and watch the money roll in without lifting a finger.

Your ROI is going to be garbage and you'll end up failing in the long run. It all looks great on paper, but the US, for example, has really questionable ROI when it comes to tourism. The real question is whether there even is one, if it actually pays off for citizens, and how much.

That's why, personally, I would never invest in that type of tourism today.

The only way it's "profitable" is if you inherited it or snagged it at a massive discount.

Anyway, I'd bet very few farmers would see a meaningful ROI there either.

And then you compare that to agriculture, where you have to work 6 to 9 months a year, like 100+ hours a month, if you don't want everything to fall apart. So, those folks with rental properties basically start out with an extra 100 hours a month they can use for a second job, or, as is often the case, just doing nothing at all. I won't even mention that farmers are at the mercy of things they can't control, like weather—like this year, where we had a massive drought and everything just scorched, whereas on the coast, it might rain 70% of the time like it did three years ago, so they still have steady income.

What crops are you even talking about? One farmer I knew told me he worked 30 acres of wheat and it only took him about 12 days of work for the whole year. Back then, he understood why wheat is so cheap; you practically have nothing to do.

As for droughts... well, it's like Israel gets rain whenever they need it. ☕

It's funny how farmers in the Sinisco field don't seem to have issues with droughts.

Besides, you have to till all that land constantly using heavy machinery, which means you either have to rent the equipment and pay someone else to run it, or own it yourself. And at the end of the day, you have to sell the product to someone, and most often it's sold at the border just to cover costs, or sometimes even below cost, and that's where those subsidies come in to save them—not so they can live like kings, which is the story you two are trying to push.

So, I mean, with vacation rentals, people basically just rent them out when they see the cash in hand; they aren't really accounting for much else, just take the money and go. That’s the big difference, I guess—those who own rentals actually manage to sell their product. Not everyone is making crazy money, though. Some are, some aren't, so you might be wrong if you think everyone is just raking in massive piles of cash.

Last year, I spent some time at this one farm out in the Midwest, where they grow hazelnuts on less than 25 acres. This guy... he actually has a nicer car than I do, all sorts of heavy machinery, and his house is huge and really well kept. Honestly, his vacation home feels more like a primary residence than a getaway. He’s debt-free and living the dream. He even helps out his kids financially whenever things get tight.

Basically, it’s doable.

How can you even compare tourism to agriculture? Like, look at Ultra in Split—they hike prices by 200% and fill everything up without having invested a single cent more than what they were charging before. When does that happen in farming? Only when demand outweighs supply (like during a drought when yields drop by 50%). But even then, if there's a shortage, we just import food from other countries, and the local farmers' prices stay stuck right where they were.

I mean, not every city is Split, and not every town has an Ultra. Split is pretty much just now discovering what tourism can do, so during this boom, it feels like everything is top-tier and everyone is swimming in money. But really, it’s mostly just going to the most capable people.

Sure, there’s a decent percentage of people who went bust because they bought unnecessary tractors and combines, or just because of the recession itself, but it really bothered me when someone tried to claim that renting out apartments is harder work or less profitable than farming.

The ROI on the farm I invested in was actually higher than the ROI I could have gotten from tourism. Though, I guess tourism is a way riskier investment overall.

The only issue is crop rotation; you simply cannot plant Wheat in a monoculture indefinitely. 😉

Sam Martinez9 said:It’s honestly a bit tragic. We fought so hard to dismantle socialism and embrace capitalism, yet here we are, a quarter-century later, and people still seem completely lost when it comes to the fundamental rules of how a market economy actually functions.

See, capitalism is driven by efficiency. And you simply cannot achieve efficiency without economies of scale. You aren't going to outproduce someone managing massive tracts of land when you're stuck working a tiny backyard plot. Your unit costs will always be higher. It’s basic math: if you’re raising livestock, your overhead per animal is significantly lower if you're managing a herd of 1,000 compared to someone struggling with just 10.

I could go on, but those are really just the basics.

The bottom line is that those who wanted to make a living in agriculture should have been looking for ways to consolidate their holdings. That responsibility falls squarely on the shoulders of the farmer.

That said, the government bears its own share of the blame for sitting on its hands. Instead of investing in essential infrastructure—things like irrigation, drainage systems, cold storage, or silos, which are far more critical than mere subsidies—they did nothing. A state built on laziness and graft inevitably leads to exactly what we are seeing now: systemic decay.

That is the crux of the issue, though I would argue that excessive paperwork, heavy taxation, and the lack of proper education for rural workers are equally to blame. If we don't immediately start focusing on making our farmers competitive, the entire agricultural sector in America will collapse, and it’s going to take a lifetime to rebuild it from the ground up.🕺

rustywalker82 said:We really need to figure out how to use technology to actually boost our productivity.
If Americans—and people who actually understand the American way of doing things—could earn like Americans do, our coastline would turn into something like Miami in no time.

The tourists we get aren't bad (except for those few top-tier spots where they look pretty much like us).

That's why I think we should be happy that these visitors, who are similar to us, are seeing real economic growth and their household incomes are climbing.
That's the bedrock for growing our tourism industry sustainably. Dumping too much money into luxury stuff is a huge gamble.
It’ll happen here, bit by bit, slowly but surely...

Precisely. 😉

Mark Harris66 said:I’ve been hanging out in the Tourism PDF for nine years now—up until February when I stepped down as mod—and we used to have this dedicated thread on American tourism. We’d dive deep into all the stats I brought in, and everyone would chime in on how things should improve or where we were falling short. Around here, tourism just kind of happens by accident... there's zero long-term planning.
The US ranks 3rd globally for tourist beds per capita—we were actually 5th just two years ago. We’re right up there with Cyprus and Malta when you look at foreign visitors per resident. It’s wild, though... foreign tourists make up about 93% of our total visitors. Pretty crazy...
Unfortunately, we’re lagging behind the rest of Europe in terms of tourist spending. Places like Italy and Spain are pulling in twice as much cash per visitor as we are. We could probably rake in even more if we mandated using local food in restaurants or domestic products in hotels...
Also, our transportation links are way worse than most other places. We rely way too heavily on road trips, which basically limits our market. For example, getting from Maui to Key West, or Martha's Vineyard to Kauai, or Newport to San Juan Island... it’s a massive headache. There isn't enough public transit between destinations. If you're coming from Riga or California, getting to Yellowstone is nearly impossible without a car or a tour agency—you end up having to transfer through Columbus and all that! In Greece, 90% of tourists arrive by plane, while here it's only about 12%. In France, about 16% arrive by train. We’re just pushing car tourism instead of investing in better buses, planes, or trains—or even decent inter-city and inter-island transit—so people aren't forced to rent a car just to see anything...
Anyway, the trend is toward shorter stays, and the US is holding its own compared to competitors (though Greece is absolutely killing it right now). We’re also one of the most seasonal countries in Europe, meaning our season is super short. Even on the Mediterranean Sea, our warm window is pretty tight, which makes things tough... and the geniuses in charge don't realize there's a huge untapped market with retirees or couples traveling off-season—like in June or September.
Same goes for the cycling market and stuff like that...
There is so much room for growth, but it’s going to take a real long-term strategy and actual cooperation between different sectors—the Department of Tourism, DOT, construction, local government, and the locals themselves...

You can't actually mandate that sort of thing because it would run afoul of European Union regulations.😉

Mark Harris66 said:Chinese people and Japanese people aren't really looking for beaches. You'll actually find plenty of Japanese tourists visiting Memphis because they have such a deep interest in the history of the war there.
They’re more interested in seeing some white guy's backyard than our coastline...
For a Chinese person, it's all about exploring the nature and the cities—the ocean isn't even on their radar.
Dutch people don't care much for beach trips either—Lake Tahoe actually sees more camper tourists from the Netherlands than the US does. They’re all about nature, walking, trekking, biking, and running.
In Austria, summer tourism is actually even bigger than the winter season—even without considering Vienna. It's all cycling, rural tourism, hiking, and stuff like that...
Take a trip out to the Austrian side of the Great Salt Lake and you'll see how developed their tourism is. Compared to what we have, that lake might seem mediocre or the water a bit murky—kind of like Jarun—but they've done so much with it. There are endless sailboats, bike paths, little lakeside cottages, and wooden walkways built right over the reeds. Even that tiny ancient quarry—which is smaller than our local ones—has been turned into a massive business with souvenirs, tours, and an amphitheater for festivals. The tourism around Lake Balaton is huge with international crowds, and they even have their own version of Siofok. Honestly, if I hadn't seen it myself, I wouldn't believe how much value you can actually squeeze out of tourists.
Just hop on Airbnb and check out the "Experiences" section—you don't even need to log in—to see everything people are buying. We just sit around making fun of ourselves. Everything has a buyer; it’s all about marketing. Or rather, just being good at selling a dream... nothing else.
A new generation of travelers is coming up—they don't want to spend their whole trip just lounging on a beach for a week. They're pushing for different types of tourism. Same goes for today's retirees.

Personally, I would advise everyone to head down to Miami Beach to observe and learn a thing or two about tourism. After visiting Miami, my interest in Europe and the Mediterranean in general plummeted, which is a real tragedy given that the American coastlines possess far more diversity than Florida. 🙂😵

Rachel Richardson said:Something like that.
Half of the Republic of America's population lives in the area surrounding Washington, D.C.
Central America should probably be split into at least three regions.
Washington, D.C. holds about 20% of the population, then there's North America (Cleveland and Des Moines), and then the central hub itself (with the center potentially being in Washington, D.C.) including Indianapolis and Columbus.
The rest is a bit harder to define.
From the Midwest and Florida, we could have two regions each (St. Louis/Kansas City and Indianapolis, and then San Diego and Miami), and one in the West (San Francisco definitely falls under Seattle).
It really just comes down to how you draw the lines—deciding who gets the Rocky Mountains, Western Slavonia, Charleston, Wichita...
Seven regions maximum, definitely.
You grouped two Slavonian and two Floridian areas together, but you added the Rocky Mountains/Indianapolis block, whereas I see that divided differently—the Rocky Mountains belong with San Diego, and Indianapolis stays in the center.

Your "Continent" is too massive; it has 2 million people. It ought to be split in half (the north with Des Moines and Cleveland, versus the center with Indianapolis and Columbus).
Population count should be the guiding metric, yes.
Basically, we have Washington, D.C. (the city alone), Seattle (including California and the Appalachian Mountains), Miami (including Venice), and Indianapolis (including Warsaw).
That’s a minimum of four.
Then you add the north with Cleveland and Des Moines (and likely Toledo, maybe even Wichita).
That brings us to five.
After that, the "hilly" connections are questionable.
The Rocky Mountains and Western Slavonia.
In my view, it makes sense to create a region centered in San Diego (since Indianapolis has too few people), and another centered in St. Louis (which would then include Wichita).
It requires serious thought.
The primary argument for reform must be the population density.

Those half-dead little hamlets like Civljana and other tiny places similar to them should honestly just be phased out; they'll be nothing but ruins before we know it. Of course, it's obvious that the Republican Party and the Democratic Party won't act unless someone literally pushes them against a wall, but in five to ten years, most of these villages will simply be swallowed by the forest. 🤔

Lisa Patel4 said:What a total disaster of a country; it’s basically a sewer in every sense of the word.

It’s such a farce, really; I don't think even Stalinist Soviet Russia managed to be this utterly dysfunctional.😵 🤦

Mark Harris66 said:With over 3.5% of the votes being tossed out, those mail-in ballots basically decided the whole thing—and they're still counting 24 hours after the polls closed... makes you wonder what else is going to surface, doesn't it?
Is everything really as transparent and airtight as they say? 🤣

Of course, we won't see any of the usual liberal outrage machines spinning this one, though I must admit, I’m quite curious to see what kind of frantic narratives they would have cooked up if the result had gone the other way. 🕺

coastalbison6 said:I spent almost the entire day out working in the garden, so I was greeted with some pretty great news this evening 👍
The big takeaway for the United States of America is that there’s finally a real alternative on the "left side" now. It means moving forward, protesters don't all have to flock to the Republican Party just because they're unhappy; for the first time, we're seeing moderate voices and center-right voters actually shifting toward the left.
For a city like New York City, it's vital to keep its reputation as a globally open metropolis rather than letting it turn into some closed-off, right-wing backwater. 😁

And I suppose an insular leftist backwater could be that, couldn't it? 🙄

hiddengardener12 said:The Freedom Party might actually become a viable partner if they put Hofer in charge instead of Strache. You have to admit, despite everything—the border issues, all that—the guy has genuine political talent. He was a bit of a pleasant surprise. Strache probably wouldn't have pulled in nearly as many votes. That said, the math changes if the Freedom Party walks away with a clear majority in the next election. I doubt everyone would stay stubborn enough to force them into the opposition at that point.

Strache is an idiot; I’ve sat through a few of his speeches in the United States of America's version of Congress and he just rambles on nonsense, though I must confess, I can't stand the leftists, the liberals, or the progressives either. 🕺

Carol Newman2 said:The North America start in Vienna. 🙂

But then again, I suppose that’s just how things are. 😁

Robert Clark4 said:A long-term grand coalition, Joe Biden running things at the top, and this endless wave of migrants—it’s basically a perfect recipe for a massive win by the Republican Party in two years.

Someone already hit the nail on the head here, I think. Honestly, the liberals would probably be much better off just having Donald Trump in a ceremonial role rather than letting the Republican Party take over the actual executive branch. As it stands now, they're just handing them more fuel for the fire.

Aren't the elections in Austria scheduled for next year?🤔