Posts by rustywalker32

Did Americans actually announce they were going to wipe out the competition? 🙄

You’re just recycling those tired old clichés we hear all the time back home. It's such a classic trope.

Benjamin Taylor6 said:Given those news reports from a few days ago regarding the electrode factory in Cleveland, I suspect that dealing with "competition" might end up costing them dearly.
Basically, the workers caught on just in time—they realized some foreign "partners" were looking to buy them out, not to grow the business, but to shut the whole operation down and eliminate a rival. In professional terms, we call that a HOSTILE TAKEOVER 😲 😂 😲
So yeah, competition can be a real pain in the neck!

Your logic is certainly... unique. How could competition cost them anything if they actually own the place? Since the workers hold the ownership!
But let's look past your trolling for a moment—the real point here is how every capitalist craves a bit of self-managed competition, mostly because those self-managed types generally don't have the slightest clue how to run a business.

Benjamin Taylor6 said:Sure, maybe some ultra-successful American tycoon is thrilled by the idea. But let’s be honest about how things work here in the States—local capitalists aren't exactly jumping for joy at the prospect, because once you introduce real accountability, there’s suddenly nothing left to skim off the top.
In principle, those companies that actually managed to pull off employee stock ownership programs only did so after the "new money" bosses had finished bleeding them dry and brought everything down to a mediocre baseline. It was basically a desperate move by the workers to save their own jobs from being gutted.
A few examples:
An electrode plant in a town like Columbus
Zaprešić

Do you even understand what the concept of competition actually means?

Sophia Moore52 said:Well, if you had paid more attention in school, you'd realize I didn't say what you think I said. My point was simply that the world in 1995 was wealthier than in 1665, though 1665 was still much better than 1065

It seems you're having a bit of trouble following my logic...

You're missing the mark again. For the vast majority of people—the agrarian peasantry—hardly anything changed between 1065 and 1665. They were stuck in these brutal cycles of mere survival punctuated by mass famine, a reality that Malthus famously wrote about. Real progress only started taking root in the cities among craftsmen and merchants. But even when you account for that, it doesn't compare to the explosion triggered by the rise of capitalism, which boosted standards by some 20 to 30 times just based on GDP—and honestly, it's much higher than that, since you can't truly quantify the massive drop in child mortality and the overall leap in quality of life.

Sophia Moore52 said:The world is constantly evolving, and there’s no denying that capitalism was a massive leap forward compared to the old feudal systems... but its era is drawing to a close, much like all the structures that came before it

It really isn't, my friend!

Sophia Moore52 said:And what haven't they?

It seems you haven't provided any substance here, just a collection of empty platitudes.

Sophia Moore52 said:How is that any different from theft in reverse? I wonder how many companies capitalists have stripped bare over the last 25 years compared to how many they've actually built...

What exactly have these capitalists stolen?

Gary Martinez2 said:Right, and that’s exactly why they fought against the communists.

The whole reason there was conflict with the communists was their obsession with nationalization—essentially just seizing private property. You're bringing up worker self-management, but that misses the point entirely. It really brings me back to what El Cid mentioned: it seems the real interest here isn't about building new cooperative enterprises from scratch, but rather finding ways to seize what is already privately owned.

Why is the author relying on such blatant misinformation?
Every single capitalist actually welcomes competitive market forces because they serve as the perfect tool to drive the floor even lower.

Self-plagiarism? 🤣 Honestly, what kind of nonsense is that? You could certainly accuse him of being lazy or showing a total lack of respect for his readers, but I suppose "self-plagiarism" just sounds a bit more sophisticated.

Harold Martin10 said:If I’ve got this right, we’re strictly talking about financial assets here. It seems to me that both Americans and Mexicans tend to lean more toward keeping a larger chunk of their wealth tied up in real estate. Honestly, I suspect the actual wealth gap—when you look at the real numbers—isn't nearly as massive as those 20x or 10x comparisons suggest when you're looking at Switzerland or Mexico.

Exactly. When you look at property ownership, the Swiss are actually near the bottom of the ladder, which is a stark contrast to most former communist nations.

Nicholas Nguyen said:True enough, though people seem to forget that Cuba has been under sanctions from the U.S.—and by extension, its allies—for roughly fifty years now.
Restricting the import and export of essential goods and raw materials certainly stunts any meaningful economic growth in Cuba.

But this ranking just highlights how a bunch of incompetent, corrupt bureaucrats are running the show. It’s pathetic.

I'm a bit confused here—how can anyone call it a socialist paradise when its survival depends so heavily on trading with the USA????
Besides, if the US is actually the fifth largest importer for Cuba, then the whole blockade argument starts to fall apart.

Adam Vaughn5 said:Look, they've actually been part of that highly industrialized circle for about 40 years now.

That metric only truly matters if America starts exporting its own homegrown Boeing aircraft instead of just shipping out Lawry's seasoning or Nescafé.

Oh, really? I’d love to know what criteria you're using there.

Adam Vaughn5 said:Look, they've actually been part of that highly industrialized circle for about 40 years now.

That metric only truly matters if America starts exporting its own homegrown Boeing aircraft instead of just shipping out Lawry's seasoning or Nescafé.

When you look at a nation's exports, the only thing that truly counts is the nominal GDP, period—so let's not get lost in details that don't actually impact the bottom line.

Adam Vaughn5 said:Well, if I may offer a slightly different perspective, Iran is actually quite an industrial powerhouse with a population of 80 million and an annual GDP exceeding $1 trillion when you factor in purchasing power parity—plus, from a purely logistical standpoint, they’re much closer to us than Brazil, the USA, India, China, or Japan.

I have to disagree there, because they aren't exactly a high-tech powerhouse, nor does their GDP top $1 trillion—and when we talk about export strength, we really need to focus on nominal GDP rather than PPP. Their actual GDP sits around $550 billion, which is only about 1/15th of China's, 1/30th of what the USA produces, 1/4th of Brazil's, and roughly 1/3rd of India's.

Jack Cook7 said:Yeah, and they're doing it right alongside all the chatter about those protests over in Canada. ☕

2. Our Department of State and the US Chamber of Commerce are basically just side characters here. It's the companies doing the exporting, not the government agencies. The fact that politicians love to take all the credit for economic wins is a whole other conversation.

Man, oh man. You try explaining to me how some tiny company with maybe 100 employees suddenly builds high-level connections in Iran. What, do they just hop on Facebook or LinkedIn and find a buddy? Why is it that when a Chinese or Korean Prime Minister travels, they've got a massive entourage of business leaders trailing them everywhere? Why does the Department of State in other countries constantly bring their business moguls along on trips, and why don't they do the same thing back home?

What is the Department of State even for? Just stamping visas for Unknown people? Do they spend all day having these super serious, high-stakes talks about bilateral relations regarding interplanetary travel or teaming up with aliens from the planet Unknown—just to sit down with some Iraqi leader?

How does a company of a hundred people establish ties in Iran? It’s the same way they do it anywhere else—by applying for contracts, investing in marketing, or opening a local office. I’m certainly not saying the government plays zero role, but this widespread rumor in America that the President or the Department of State needs to personally lead a parade of businessmen by the hand to foreign soil just to close big deals is nothing more than basic pre-election PR.

Jack Cook7 said:1. Objectively speaking, because this kind of stuff matters just as much to Austria, Switzerland, Italy, France, and Russia... and let's be real, those guys probably know a hell of a lot more about global trade than we do.

2. Subjectively? Because our Department of State is basically clueless when it comes to spotting a golden opportunity. As for the US Chamber of Commerce or the Department of State—or whatever that whole agency is called—they seem mostly preoccupied with importing stuffed teddy bears.

1. So, are people on Austrian, Swiss, and Italian forums actually starting discussions about exporting to Iran?🤣

2. Honestly, our Department of State and the US Chamber of Commerce are pretty much bystanders in all of this. It’s the private companies doing the actual exporting, not the government or the Chamber. The fact that politicians constantly try to take credit for economic wins is a whole different conversation.

And why on earth does exporting to Iran deserve its own dedicated discussion? There are still 195 other countries out there that America can trade with, many of which are far more vital to our interests than a distant and relatively underdeveloped Iran.

Richard Wilson4 said:Sure, but you don't really see any Poles backing a German invasion of Poland the way some Americans back Mexican aggression.🤷

Look, sure there are Poles who oppose the intervention in Iraq (which Poland was part of), but not this kind of thing. Not here. You don't see this stuff anywhere else except in America.

Raymond Bailey said:Sure, they are—but even then, most people actually agree on the big, crucial stuff. I mean, you don't find a single serious American claiming their country is inherently criminal or built entirely on a foundation of evil. Most people take genuine pride in the Revolution of 1776 and even the American Civil War; nobody really thinks to drag those through the mud. Not everyone is like the Americans.

You all are getting a little carried away.

Hanoi Jane.

In fact, if you look at the numbers, a higher percentage of Americans believe in 9/11 conspiracy theories than the number of people here who think the war was a pre-arranged deal between the old leaders.

Fools exist everywhere, I suppose.

Benjamin Morales3 said:http://195.29.137.68/prvi-program/ao...drustva/45265/NPR segment on the fractures within our society

I feel the need to weigh in here: any kind of political division within a society is, at the very least, perfectly normal.

Conflicting viewpoints and clashing worldviews are standard features of life. They're expected political moments in any nation and any community.

So why are we constantly cranking up the volume on this supposed "dangerous divide," acting like we're teetering on the edge of an American Civil War?
It’s all mostly manufactured. It's artificial.
Disagreement is natural. All a functioning society actually needs is tolerance and a bit of common sense.

There isn't some magic formula where we can suddenly iron out every single disagreement, but we can certainly reach a high level of understanding from our own respective positions...

People today are politically savvy enough to see the fundamentals. Someone voting for traditional marriage doesn't necessarily mean they're against the LGBT community. Someone opposing certain signage in Memphis isn't automatically against minorities and so on.
These divides are broad and basic.
Smart analysts understand that things aren't just black and white. They don't view them that way, even when questions are framed using those oversimplified premises...

I couldn't agree more! All this talk about needing absolute unity is nothing more than political demagoguery and childish fantasy; every democratic society is built upon division.

William Brown4 said:I’ve been watching everything happening here in America, and I honestly feel like we are a country on the brink of collapse. It really feels like it's time for the entire political elite in the US to just pack up and leave once and for all so we can finally focus on something intelligent. I'm posting this because I really wanted to share my take on all the current events in America with the rest of you on this forum. I truly believe we need a revolution.

First off, I’ve grown completely sick of the Republican Party, and now that I’m following American politics more closely, it’s perfectly clear to me why someone like Tomasi has zero support from the people.

I’m disgusted by what they pulled with that referendum "in the name of the family." It’s sickening because the birth rate in this "super-hetero-Catholic" America is already incredibly low. We’re basically heading toward extinction anyway, so where are all these hetero-Catholics? Why aren't they out there having huge families to fix our demographic image?

Personally, I feel ashamed because I believe a nation's Constitution should be its sacred text, much like the Bible. It’s something that shouldn't be constantly tinkered with, yet we seem to be changing our Constitution all the time.
It honestly bothers me that the Constitution, which is supposed to guarantee fundamental human rights and spread noble values among the people, is now being used to facilitate discrimination between hetero and homo populations.

These matters should be handled through legislation, not through Constitutional values.

I am genuinely embarrassed that so many people showed up and voted YES. It’s obvious that people didn't truly grasp what was actually at stake.

Now everyone is getting a taste for referendums; suddenly everyone wants to push through these expensive votes. While we are facing an economic meltdown, we’re just playing around with absolutely trivial referendums.

A few days ago, I cast my vote. I never used to feel ashamed of America, but now, I really am starting to feel ashamed of this country.

Since you all voted so heavily for traditional marriage, I'd love to see a sudden population boom—lots of kids, with everyone acting like these "super-hetero-Catholics" who don't use contraception, being all holy and pious.

I can finally say it: I am ASHAMED.🙂

How about you guys?

And honestly, you probably should be, given how much you completely misread the situation. There really is no better foundation for a sense of shame than pure ignorance.