100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: How confident are you in the new world order? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Well, it’s true that the oriental world has gained territory and influence over the decades but I’m not all that worried. ISIS has been beaten by a coalition of American-French-German-British troops. I think that the restlessness that occured in the Middle-East in the last 5 years was the result of the Arab revolution in which a lot of dictators like Kaddhafi fell. Dictators knew how to keep structure in their country/regime. Once the regime falls, the structure falls away as well. An exception to this rule is Assad in Syria. Overall, I still think that with the US behind us Europe has nothing to fear. Iran can threaten however much it wants, the US is the country with all the weapons. So, to answer your question : my balance didn’t change because of the oriental influences. I think that the occidental world is strong enough and that ultimately it will be nuclear weapons that will cause us to succumb as a culture. ISIS is not defeated. They are like cockroaches and I guarantee they have a ton of sleepers in the US and through out Europe. Nuclear weapons are a red haring. They have only been used once in history to end World War II. They wont be used again. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
that people who get rich, don't always do so for the ideal reasons that they are supposed to use to get rich. When someone comes up with a better and cheaper product to compete their way to riches, that's the ideal that most people like to expect has happened. But throughout our history, many people who became rich, especially when they did so in large numbers and very rapidly, it was because the system was rigged in their favor, and too often, not because they produced any REAL wealth at all. IgorFrankensteen I dont want to start off by poisoning the well or sounding cacophonous, but for a guy that claims he is a student of history you are sure cherry picking things. You are comparing Mercantilism to so called capitalism ? The system was rigged in mercantilism yes, but not capitalism, for the sake of time Im not going to get into the differences between cronyism and laissez faire, so we shall use the broad term "capitalism" or market economy. Our own most recent near financial collapse, was due to lots of FAKE wealth being created. And during the so-called Golden Age of early industrialism in the US, although some millionaires did things right, many more got to where they did by using the Federal and State government military power to force laborers to accept low pay and poor working conditions. IgorFrankensteen one has nothing to so with the other , wealth created in the golden age fell into two groups, those who did it without government help eg, the Vanderbilts, the Westinghouse's, Rockafeller, J.J.Hill etc, and those that used their government influences like Leland Stanford ,jay gould and jay fisk and Russell Sage as examples. men like George Westinghouse who treated their employees well and Rockefeller treated his employees fairly, but no one on the left talks about them right? Then as now, the problem of great wealth disparity wasn't the FACT of it. There's nothing inherently damaging to a society in having very very rich people around. The problem then as now, was HOW the wealth disparity came about, and was maintained. IgorFrankensteen Wealth disparity has always existed, it first came to light during the great depression and continued on ever since, and of course you forgot to mention before FDR policies came in effect that a lot of these Wealthy people set up huge charities to help the poor, no one talks about that Riches acquired by buying a company, then breaking it up and selling off the pieces, lowering employee pay and benefits, and/or eliminating safety procedures, doesn't create any real wealth at all. But it has been done many times. IgorFrankensteen Igor, mergers and acquisition have been going on in America since 1893, in Finance we call them "waves", it was made into a specialty industry in the 1980's, today we are in the "seventh wave" starting in 2014. and made possible thanks to government regulations, you forgot to mention that . Riches acquired by arranging high pay for upper officers and investors, while running the company into the ground through mismanagement doesn't create any real wealth either. IgorFrankensteen that is why corporate governance exists today because of the crap that happened during the Clinton administration and late into George H.W.Bush's administration. Buying bad loans and selling them as high quality loans actually destroys real wealth, and was the primary cause of the last downturn. And of course, riches gained by driving down worker pay, destroys real wealth too. IgorFrankensteen Two different things Igor, and it has nothing to do with the driving workers pay down.Look at the real cause of why workers pay has stagnated. And why did certain entities sell off bad loans in the first place is the question one should be asking? Although you want to believe you've overturned everything I said, for the most part, you simply ignored it, and in some cases, supported it while adding personal insults. For example, "Two different things, Igor." Of COURSE they were two different things, which is why I set them apart as independent, single sentence paragraphs. Please pause in your biased attacks, long enough to read what I actually say, and stick to that. Your pretense that nothing was done wrong by businesses during Republican administrations is abject nonsense. Much of what I described took place during the Reagan and Bush administrations. I didn't at any time say that ONLY Republicans do things wrong, either. And going back to your rather rude repetition that the bad behaviors I described are not "capitalism" is nonsense entirely. Unless you can prove that capitalism was declared at an end repeatedly, and was openly replaced by "mercantilism" or "cronyism," your claim that my points are invalid, is without merit. And by the way, mercantilism and cronyism are subsets of capitalism, not alternatives to it. They are known dangers of UNREGULATED capitalism, as many other abusive behaviors are. And by the way, you failed to read many other things I wrote, including that it is FALSE to say that some of the turn-of-the-previous-century very rich people, accomplished what they did "on their own." No one does that. They all depended on Government enforcement of property rights, ownership of patents, and most important, the ability to ignore worker concerns if they wished to. To be sure, there have been employers over the centuries who did treat their employees well, and I never even HINTED otherwise, though you appear to be certain I did so explicitly. Please go back and read what I ACTUALLY said, and respond accurately. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
chairman_z
on
Mon 07/23/18 05:13 PM
|
|
Although you want to believe you've overturned everything I said, for the most part, you simply ignored it, and in some cases, supported it while adding personal insults. For example, "Two different things, Igor." Of COURSE they were two different things, which is why I set them apart as independent, single sentence paragraphs. Please pause in your biased attacks, long enough to read what I actually say, and stick to that. Your pretense that nothing was done wrong by businesses during Republican administrations is abject nonsense. Much of what I described took place during the Reagan and Bush administrations. I didn't at any time say that ONLY Republicans do things wrong, either. And going back to your rather rude repetition that the bad behaviors I described are not "capitalism" is nonsense entirely. Unless you can prove that capitalism was declared at an end repeatedly, and was openly replaced by "mercantilism" or "cronyism," your claim that my points are invalid, is without merit. And by the way, mercantilism and cronyism are subsets of capitalism, not alternatives to it. They are known dangers of UNREGULATED capitalism, as many other abusive behaviors are. And by the way, you failed to read many other things I wrote, including that it is FALSE to say that some of the turn-of-the-previous-century very rich people, accomplished what they did "on their own." No one does that. They all depended on Government enforcement of property rights, ownership of patents, and most important, the ability to ignore worker concerns if they wished to. To be sure, there have been employers over the centuries who did treat their employees well, and I never even HINTED otherwise, though you appear to be certain I did so explicitly. Please go back and read what I ACTUALLY said, and respond accurately. IgorFrankensteen And yet you insult me very cleverly I might add, no matter what I say or how I say it , it will come across as rude to you Igor. I'm not saying you are wrong because you disagree with me, Im saying you're wrong about certain facts and Ive tried to post relevant facts to back up my opinion on why you are wrong. Okay so I will start over again, you mentioned most of your facts stems from the Reagan and Bush(41) era... fine, even though you did mentioned the golden era/gilded age. My original point was people making money because of the gold exchange, vs the gold standard vs fiat money cannot be compared. You talk about finance during the Bush and Reagan years, while its true men and some women got super rich on paper because of the result of fiat money when Nixon took America off the gold standard. Bond traders before the 80's barely made a living most had to get a second job just to survive and fiat money replaced the gold standard and the feds(The federal reserve) manipulated the money supply and interest rates, Bond traders like Bill Gross saw opportunities and ran with it, today a bond trader earns 100 X more than their predecessors in the 1970's and early 80's. Do you blame capitalism for that or government policies? And by the way, mercantilism and cronyism are subsets of capitalism, not alternatives to it. They are known dangers of UNREGULATED capitalism, as many other abusive behaviors are. IgorFrankensteen Again, I don't know how to say this without sound rude... here goes. You are wrong sir, mercantilism and capitalism are not the same thing, they are not subsets. mercantilism was a system where the government or monarch incentivized businesses or merchants to trade on their behalf and they were giving monopolies and protection, they were an extension of the state. In mercantilism only the privileged got rich and remained wealthy Capitalism quite simply is a political and economic system that advocates the means of production, distribution and trade owned by individuals for profit by way of a free market, it advocates the importance of private property and your rights, and it advocates liberty and free market principles govern by objective laws. Adam Smith referred to this as “laissez faire” , anyone can get rich in Capitalism. We wont get into crony capitalism, too long of a discussion, by the way there is no such thing as unregulated capitalism, it has never existed. And by the way, you failed to read many other things I wrote, including that it is FALSE to say that some of the turn-of-the-previous-century very rich people, accomplished what they did "on their own." No one does that. They all depended on Government enforcement of property rights, ownership of patents, and most important, the ability to ignore worker concerns if they wished to. IgorFrankensteen No, I understood everything you've posted I tried to address it. That isn't what I said when I posted they did it own their own, I said on their own meaning without government help or connection and I gave you examples like Leland Stanford and jay Frick who had connections with the government vs Rockefeller who did not have connections with the government and who simply made his products better and cheaper than the competition and outsold them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The new world will attempt to combine humans and technology called Transhumanism. As in the days of Noah so shall be the coming of the son of God. And no I am not looking forward to the robotic lifeless future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The REAL "New" world order is the "Global Awareness" of every person on the planet in real-time.
It is still in a state of becoming. It involves gobal communication in real-time. The political "New World Order" is only part of the real "New" world order. Political policies will change many times as the people of Earth gain awareness and understanding globally. |
|
|
|
|
