Posts by wiredmason19

analogridge312 said:360 people lurking here and all I get is a handful of comments!

Either I’ve just typed out absolute nonsense, or this is the cold, hard truth that everyone is too stunned to even argue with.😁
All things considered, the next few months are going to be a hell of a ride.🙂

I read that too, but since I don't know enough about economics to write a sophisticated analysis, I just sat back, read it, and waited until today to see if anyone had actually started a real conversation about it...🙂

And yeah, I’d much rather have one solid, insightful post than ten mindless ones—though I suppose I might be falling into that second category myself, but whatever...

feralcanyon73 said:This whole Google thing is just an unsustainable artificial construct.

well, I have to say I don't quite see eye to eye with you on this one... look, I’m certainly no prophet, so I can't tell you exactly what things will look like fifty years down the road, but there is just no way this whole thing falls apart within the next ten...

Andrew Chase31 said:If the United Kingdom is such a great community, then why is there all this talk about Scottish independence? Why did the English and Scots fight such a long, bloody war if things were going so well for the Scots? And look at Northern Ireland—why has it been the way it has for decades when people supposedly thrive in communities together? Or look at the mess in Belgium, where people have been living side-by-side for ages despite different backgrounds and socioeconomic statuses. Based on what you're saying, they should be thrilled to live in a community since inequality is totally normal... I won't even get into the examples of Mexico, Georgia, or South Ossetia; they've clearly shown that trying to maintain a community with unequal benefits doesn't always end well.

Don't take this the wrong way, but in Europe—which showed about 15 to 20 years ago just how much people love their distinct communities—you seem to expect that we can just create one giant state without any fighting. I'll say it again: even Americans fought each other over socioeconomic divides (the American Civil War, for instance), so I suspect the same thing would happen to Europeans pretty soon.

I respect your view; you believe in the European Union and its evolution, whereas I'm a bit more skeptical. So, I don't see much point in us arguing over our differing perspectives.

I almost wish socioeconomic differences were the *only* reason wars started, instead of things like religion, nationality, or race...

vividfalcon54 said:You mentioned English, but think about who actually holds all the cards from birth. Who doesn't need anything beyond their native tongue? Who can just pack up and travel the entire world with nothing but their mother tongue? An American probably couldn't.🤷

But look... they basically paved their own way through history to make it this way... whereas we never really did...

Arthur Anderson49 said:Man, our history gets even messier when you think about it... When was the last time we actually ran the show on our own terms? Back during the days of Tomislav, Mutimir, Držislav, and all those high-society types?

Look, we’ve always been a relatively small nation, so it makes sense that someone else would exert influence over us, whether it's direct or just behind the scenes..........

The real question is just how much control we've actually surrendered. It feels like if you look back over the last century, we might have actually had the most leverage during the mid-20th century era, back when there were even times when others were answering to us instead...

Arthur Anderson49 said:That's why I wrote last time. But hey, fine; I guess I wasn't clear enough.

And my bad, that was totally on me

BuzzFeed😳sorry for the misunderstanding, but I was under the impression that the first phase was basically just a semi-colony or something like that...

Arthur Anderson49 said:Nah, I wasn't really talking about the Kingdom of America. It wasn't exactly a genius state by any means, but let's be real—it wasn't nearly as incompetent as people try to make it out to be later on, right?

So why on earth did you pick 1941 then, man?

You could have easily gone with any year in the 1920s or 1930s, but no, you had to go straight for 1941...

That's what threw me off so much...

It’s kind of like someone trying to talk about a different era of the US and deciding to start with 1991...

Arthur Anderson49 said:If my hazy memory serves me right, the Kingdom of America wasn't actually leaning on foreign cash at all. At one point—somewhere in the 1920s—they were even sending grain aid over to hungry Sweden! I know, sounds totally wild looking back from today, right?

But once the Communist era hit, everything changed. They became dependent, and honestly, it never really stopped after that.

Someone mentioned 1941, probably referring to the start of the Independent State of America... that's what I was getting at when I talked about Central European support rather than Western support...

TRANSLATED: We've always been under Western influence, and we're going to be for a long time to come...

Noah Cruz75 said:That's exactly what the administration is banking on—that we're too few to matter. But their clock is ticking. The European Union is just going to keep dropping demands we can't meet, and it might be time to take a stand against them. I see a standoff with the EU as an option, but I'm worried it'll eventually boil over into a full-blown revolution to oust everyone who's been lying to the American people for years.

I’m with you there; we definitely need to get this current leadership out of office through peaceful protests and everything, but I don't really see why we should be picking a fight with the European Union... if you ask me, they're actually our lifeline...

Arthur Anderson49 said:So what? It’s always been this way. I mean, the last time things actually looked different was back in 1941, if I recall correctly.

The only real solution I see is a full-blown revolution—basically the working class just rising up because they can't afford their loans or even basic groceries anymore.

Yeah, sure thing. Because a revolution is definitely going to put food on everyone's table.

Wait, so you're saying that back in 1941, we weren't even relying on Western currency, but instead were tied to Central European money????????

Noah Cruz75 said:We’re already done for. We're 100% reliant on Western cash and loans, even if nobody wants to admit it. Our leaders are completely beholden to whatever instructions they get from the West.
The only way out is a revolution—the kind where the working class finally snaps because they can't afford their debts or even basic survival anymore.

Honestly, we brought this entire situation on ourselves............and a revolution won't actually change anything since there just aren't enough of us left to make an impact........our only real shot is to send our youth abroad to get the best education possible and then somehow bring them back home to lead the country...

Of course, it would also be nice to see a total overhaul of the political class...

Noah Cruz75 said:You really think you can change a national mindset that easily?
It doesn't make sense. The people tasked with cleaning up corruption are usually the ones deepest in it.
We aren't solving this anytime soon—not for at least 20 years. We're nowhere near ready. Even Bulgaria and Romania haven't managed it, and they're already in the European Union.
There’s a lot of rot here. To put it poetically, "something is deeply decayed within the state of Denmark."

It’s hard to argue that Western Europe is any more corrupt than we are, but the truth is, you can't change a culture overnight, though I do believe that joining the European Union will definitely help accelerate that shift...

Noah Cruz75 said:Time for a new revolution. We need to end this whole European Union delusion and kick the Euro puppets out of office.
That’s an uphill battle. In the US, we don't even have a real opposition to the establishment; they just won't let any actual alternative gain traction.
I see a revolution against the European Union as the only way out.

I actually see things quite differently than that..........

In a country as small as ours, being part of the European Union could actually help us tackle corruption and maybe even shift the local mindset for the better, which is something we really could use right now...

restlesscrane152 said:Even the Bolshevik Revolution...

So, you have this one group that essentially orchestrates an entire revolution just to seize control of the government... I mean, what exactly is so strange about that part...😁

Richard Wilson4 said:I’ve got a real allergy to those Marxist takes on history...

Wealth or poverty rarely trigger wars or nationalistic hatreds—well, maybe a bit more often in the 20th century, but even then, they aren't the main driver...

If you had taken a closer look at my previous post, you might have noticed I actually wrote that... once all the other distinctions fade away (you know, when we eventually all share the same nationality, religion, skin color, eye color, and whatever else makes us different), that's when the only conflicts left will be between the haves and the have-nots...

And one more thing... I’d bet anything that the Hundred Years' War wasn't fought over something trivial like quail in New Zealand... oh wait, it wasn't... it was fought to grab more wealth and consolidate power... there isn't a single war in history that hasn't been driven by the pursuit of new territory, riches, or influence...

northernhawk55 said:So, erasing the unique ethnic and cultural identities of small nations is the "right way" for Europe?

Thanks, bye.
An America where you can't hear Gaelic, Basque, or English anymore just isn't America.

those national characteristics will never truly vanish entirely.......

And honestly, we should be thankful that most of the people in our immediate region share similar backgrounds, so we aren't constantly clashing with everyone else over identity issues... do you realize that if religious and all those other deep-seated differences eventually fade away in the distant future, the only conflicts left will be between the wealthy and the poor, which sounds a whole lot better to me than the current state of affairs where people count every single tiny difference like they're counting grains of sand........

Just think about how much blood has been spilled between various small groups all because of those specific cultural traits...... even among us Americans, history shows there have been countless internal struggles, not to mention the conflicts with much larger powers.......

which is why I truly believe an America where those differences aren't so sharply drawn is the only way to ensure a future without war and one filled with economic prosperity

P. S. Just to be clear, I'm not saying we should get rid of traditional dances or folk costumes, I just think the idea of a melting pot isn't such a bad thing after all...

Richard Wilson4 said:Personally, I care...

I mean, look at it this way. Some Arab guy moves in and lands a job at a local firm just because he's willing to take a lower paycheck. Meanwhile, the guy who actually deserves that spot—whose dad and grandpa probably spent their whole lives building up that business—gets passed over. That matters.

So, are you saying Arab people are somehow less valuable than anyone else????????

If an Arab immigrant has all the right credentials to, say, be a surgeon and they’re willing to do the job for $10k—assuming those are realistic numbers—while an American professional is asking for $12k, who would you actually hire in that situation??????

I mean, wasn't the whole point of moving away from socialism toward a capitalist system to embrace this kind of market competition, isn't it?...

northernhawk55 said:

I mean, maybe a total unification will happen eventually, but let's be real—language, religion, and national identity are gonna be massive roadblocks.

When it comes to language, a few big ones will dominate while everything else just fades out... I mean, everyone's learning English in school anyway.

Religion? In America, it’s not even that huge of a deal in most places since things are pretty secularized.

Nationalism—now that's a headache. But you could probably fix that with enough propaganda, making everyone feel like "Europeans" first, and then maybe Americans, French, or whatever.

So yeah, in my book, nationalism is the biggest hurdle, whereas religious stuff is way easier to get past.

If that happens, it won't even be the real Europe anymore. It'll just be some European version of America—a giant melting pot where local culture, language, and identity vanish. Smaller nations like ours, or anything similar in size, will disappear first, then the mid-sized ones, until all we're left with are the big English, French, or German-speaking powers.

That’s definitely not the right move for Europe.

I actually think that might be the right path for Europe... though, like someone else mentioned, as long as you're well-fed and living in a decent environment, it doesn't really matter to you if your neighbor is Black or white, or if they're overweight or thin...

I honestly think that a full unification will happen eventually, though we’re still looking at some massive hurdles like language barriers, religious differences, and deep-seated national identities...

When you look at the language issue, I suspect there will be a handful of dominant languages that take over, while the smaller ones slowly fade into the background.......after all, everyone is basically learning English in school anyway...

As for religion—in the US, it just doesn't carry quite as much weight as it used to in certain areas, since most of our society has become pretty secularized over time...

Now, nationality—that’s going to be a real challenge, but I feel like it could be managed if we used enough media influence to get people to identify as Americans first, and then maybe as people from New York, Texas, or California later on...

So, in my view, the biggest obstacle is definitely national identity, whereas religious differences would probably be the easiest hurdle to clear...