patrick.net

MershedPerturders says

indigenous, how close are you to retirement?

Not for awhile. Why?

indigenous says

MershedPerturders says

indigenous, how close are you to retirement?

Not for awhile. Why?

what's 'a while'?

mell says

In any case, I bet you that by 2020 to 2030 at the latest people will regret not having invested in Russia.

Lol. If you want to give Putin and former KGB folks your money, go right ahead.

freak80 says

mell says

In any case, I bet you that by 2020 to 2030 at the latest people will regret not having invested in Russia.

Lol. If you want to give Putin and former KGB folks your money, go right ahead.

It's not as easy to invest in foreign assets, mine are mainly tied to US and Europe. Without going into Putin's history and political background, I think he is outsmarting most western leaders (that doesn't make him good or bad) by a lot and is being heavily underestimated.

From Wikipedia:

Under the presidency of Vladimir Putin Russia's economy saw the nominal Gross Domestic Product (GDP) double, climbing from 22nd to 11th largest in the world. The economy made real gains of an average 7% per year ( 1999: 6.5%, 2000: 10%, 2001: 5.7%, 2002: 4.9%, 2003: 7.3%, 2004: 7.2%, 2005: 6.4%, 2006: 8.2%, 2007: 8.5%, 2008: 5.2% ), making it the 6th largest economy in the world in GDP(PPP). In 2007, Russia's GDP exceeded that of 1990, meaning it has overcome the devastating consequences of the recession in the 1990s.[37]
During Putin's eight years in office, the industry grew by 75%, investments increased by 125%,[37] and agricultural production and construction increased as well. Real incomes more than doubled and the average salary increased eightfold from $80 to $640.[38][39][40] The volume of consumer credit between 2000–2006 increased 45 times,[41][42] and during that same time period, the middle class grew from 8 million to 55 million, an increase of 7 times. The number of people living below the poverty line also decreased from 30% in 2000 to 14% in 2008.[37][43][44]

Putin may be out now and there seems to be a slight recent slowdown amid continued inflationary forces, but I'd still call this a heck of an economic track record (as compared to dubya and obummer).

freak80 says

mell says

In any case, I bet you that by 2020 to 2030 at the latest people will regret not having invested in Russia.

Lol. If you want to give Putin and former KGB folks your money, go right ahead.

they just want to spitefully give air to Putin and friends knowing they pose a real challenge to the US. gives them a sense of satisfaction. What they miss however is that Russia is right next door, ready to roll in on their perfect little European paradises and the only thing that was keeping them from doing so was US power. We'll see how much they like a weak US very soon.

mell, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Russia is owned by uberillionaires who make money from international crime and natural gas. The average russian wants out of there desperately. I know this from experience I used to sleep with a Russian girl every single night.

you might think it's fun to promote Ameirca's long time rival because you hate America so much, but what you don't see is what will happen to Europe in a situation where Russia is strong. Basically, we go back to worrying about our own problems, and while Europeans are arguing over who has the best pastries, Russia is going to dominate you completely. They weren't too far away what was it 20 years ago? Bet you just loved the GDR didn't you?

I don't hate any country, I like a lot about the US - e.g. Ron Paul ;) - why else would I have moved here? Take a look at this:

http://www.gfmag.com/tools/global-database/economic-data/11944-wealth-distribution-income-inequality.html#axzz2fObfAiwe

and find the income/wealth inequality values for the US and Russia, they are very similar, except for that they have been moving in opposite directions. What you are saying about Russia has changed. I have not encountered the "I want out" mentality amongst the Russians I know (male or female). For sure the US has been the promised land for many throughout the decades to escape and make it through hard work (or marriage) and it still has a lot of appeal, but times have changed and continue to do so while we are fighting the stupid "Republican" vs "Democrat" fight from our armchairs. I have worked with quite a few bright Indian HW/SW engineers and more and more have gone back to India and founded their own companies where they claim an able, talented entrepreneurial mind can have a better lifestyle than over here. Repeating over and over again that Russia (or India for that matter) are shit-holes does nothing to impede the economic decline of the US vs its counterparts.

mell says

I don't hate any country, I like a lot about the US - e.g. Ron Paul

have you noticed that many Ron Paul supporters are recent immigrants?

Ron Paul is not patriotic, he's not pro-US. He wants to turn the country into a shopping mall.

egads101 says

yeah, russia is fantastic!

http://youtu.be/KUfHxsw0suE

http://youtu.be/WLcYvNDtHKU

Looks like Highway 101 in the San Francisco bay area during daily commute hours. Not everybody wants to live in the desert ;)

egads101 says

yeah, russia is fantastic!

http://youtu.be/KUfHxsw0suE

http://youtu.be/WLcYvNDtHKU

dont take her seriously.

she's just one of these 'in it for the money' Americans(not even sure if she's a citizen) who is dismembering everything America stands for. They dont respect America's real position in the world, certainly not if they are German. For them it's a bothersome outpost of European Colonial Civilization, rather than the conclusion to European Civilization.

eventually I think America is going to tun on these 'in it for the money' people into something like national socialism. Actually I think many countries will revert to something like National Socialism.

part of the problem with internet forums are you really don't even know who you're talking to.

you want to see what Russian Culture is like?

http://www.youtube.com/embed/02Xz8b4ABeI

MershedPerturders says

part of the problem with internet forums are you really don't even know who you're talking to.

Yeah, especially when you get the gender wrong ;)
I have quite a few relatives in the northern US and Canada and have been debating against anti-american stances amongst my friends in Europe whenever appropriate. I don't like being pressed into any political stereotype (why is that sometimes so hard to understand) and last time I checked the cold war was over.

"There is no such thing as a national feeling that aims only to benefit personal interest."

-Mein Kampf

If mell's attitude continues to proliferate, California, and most of the country will be completely unliveable. They try to justify it with these absurd 'free market' ideas, but it's just about personal gain. You will find invariably that these people belong to some other ethnic group and they view America as a place to 'make money' as mell has already described.

MershedPerturders says

you want to see what Russian Culture is like?

Ok I get it you don't think much of Russia - let's just agree to disagree. But really plenty of homeless and drugged people peeing and shitting on the streets of San Francisco every day in broad daylight, sometimes "sprinkling" people passing by on their way to work.. Esp. when it comes to homelessness numbers the US does not look good. Quality of live is a very complex and sometimes subjective matter.

MershedPerturders says

If mell's attitude continues to proliferate, California, and most of the country will be completely unliveable. They try to justify it with these absurd 'free market' ideas, but it's just about personal gain. You will find invariably that these people belong to some other ethnic group and they view America as a place to 'make money' as mell has already described.

I'm not a die-hard Libertarian just because I don't like the Fed and the useless wars we waste money and lives on, and advocate the federal legalization of pot etc. Or maybe I am, but no politician or political party is perfect. There are many variations, this one for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_libertarianism

I'm a left-libertarian more or less.

I'd like to think Geolibertarianism would be sufficient, but I do know it's necessary.

Even the socialist scandinavian paradises have now screwed themselves again letting their land markets get out of whack, with truly colossal borrowing being allowed to go on, from the Netherlands to Sweden.

Bellingham Bill says

Even the socialist scandinavian paradises have now screwed themselves again letting their land markets get out of whack, with truly colossal borrowing being allowed to go on, from the Netherlands to Sweden

ultimately any nation rests on the work and honor of it's citizens. You can't get people to work hard, risk their lives, and honor a country that they don't have any ownership in. It works for a while, get people to develop markets and give them what they believe is a everlasting title to land while they work, work, work for it. Then everything changes, the politics flip over and those people lose their holdings(probably by jacking up property taxes). Do you really think the country will bail out bankrupt california while californians pay very low property taxes? nope- first the taxes will shoot sky high.

I still remember in the late 80s, people couldnt get rid of their property. It was a pain to own it. To many rules for tenants, too high taxes- that's what owning property will be like. You can't stop it, because the younger generations are just getting angry, they're stating their grievances, theyre organizing, and you wont be able to stop them.

Bellingham Bill says

I'm a left-libertarian more or less.

I'd like to think Geolibertarianism would be sufficient, but I do know it's necessary.

Even the socialist scandinavian paradises have now screwed themselves again letting their land markets get out of whack, with truly colossal borrowing being allowed to go on, from the Netherlands to Sweden.

I think that's very interesting but very hard to merge with the traditional strong "property rights" in the sense that people consider land property as well. Personally I could go with trying it (I am not big on owning) after some practical problems are solved (who determines how much which land is worth, politicians?) , but if people think "regular" Libertarians are already way out there they will have an equally hard if not harder time with this concept ;)

all these ideas like Geolibertarianism seem just dandy if you have time to wank off on internet forums all day. Im interested in practical solutions that work.

Bellingham Bill says

I'd like to think Geolibertarianism would be sufficient, but I do know it's necessary.

There is nothing libertarian about "Geolibertarianism." It should be properly called Geosocialism. It's a good sign that nowadays even the closet socialists are afraid of associating themselves with the S-word. Nothing but disaster will come out of central planning by bureacrats, regardless whether the finite resource under management is goods, labor or land.

Even the socialist scandinavian paradises have now screwed themselves again letting their land markets get out of whack, with truly colossal borrowing being allowed to go on, from the Netherlands to Sweden.

The common failing is socialist central planning, especially for their currency. It is not a co-incidence the in Karl Marx' Communist Manifesto of 1848, Plank #5 (out of 10 planks) is advocacy for central banking.

MershedPerturders says

indigenous says

MershedPerturders says

indigenous, how close are you to retirement?

Not for awhile. Why?

what's 'a while'?

Do you have a point?

Reality says

Nothing but disaster will come out of central planning by bureacrats, regardless whether the finite resource under management is goods, labor or land.

That would have been where I see the biggest issue, somebody would have to "plan" and "assess" the value of the land in order to figure out what others have to pay to use it. However we do have the concept of common land even in the current system, e.g. beaches/parks that cannot be build upon to guarantee access for the public or other national parks/forests where it is the government who charges fess for use in exchange for upkeep. Also, if you reduce the scope of the government and partition it into smallest possible communities (which have some sort of autonomy in deciding how "their" land is used), then central planning can be minimized - not sure about the bureaucracy ;)

Libertarianism: proof that an indoctrination campaign can get people to believe just about anything.

It seems to me that the Fed, being broke read beyond broke, can no longer afford to bribe the states with the federal whatever program, consequently it seems to me that more and more states are going to be nullifying the FED rather than the other way around. What is your take on this?

Do yous see that the Libertarian party is gaining populararity? Of course Noam Chomsky thinks he is a Libertarian, so maybe it is wishful thinking

MershedPerturders says

Libertarianism: proof that an indoctrination campaign can get people to believe just about anything.

Like the all-knowing and all-good Government-God that the closet socialists and out-of-closet socialists are brain-washed into believing and presuming in every single argument.

the fact is that there is only one government solution left: National Socialism.

what this suggests however is a question none of us are willing to ponder: what ethnicity constitutes the nation?

ultimately, it's about survival. When you subtract all these silly notions of wealth and innovation, you are left with the issue of FAMILY, and family leads to TRIBE. What tribe do you belong to? it will be a far more important question than it is today.

our current economies run on borrowed money from the future. Eventually, when enough people want to collect on that borrowed money, the system completely collapses in on itself. Not only does it render the nation insolvent, it renders the entire national concept INVALID.

who is ultimately going to be responsible for these wars, this pollution, this waste, this inhuman abuse? WHO? some asshole in a convertible in california, twice divorced, on pharmaceutical drugs, a pointless job in processing some nonsense in some office somewhere in bay area?

Americans have really lost sight of reality, they don't consider the effect they're having on the world, they dont think about how much the world hates them all and wants their way of life to end.

MershedPerturders says

the fact is that there is only one government solution left: National Socialism.

Mashed tators

You are ambigous. We have socialism now?

In large part the debt will be paid for through inflation. If the polticians grow a pair they will just default, as you said at that point it will be about survival.

I'm not sure we are as hated as you think.

If the country did default then the healing could begin. Unfortunately it will instead gimp along like the UK or Argentina for an extended period

if we hyperinflate to pay the debt, we will not be able to finance anything including our military and many other important things. We will not be able to afford oil. Anyone on a pension will not be able to buy anything with their payments.

this American form of domination is coming to an end very soon. Can't you see them positioning themselves? Can't you see our government preparing for this eventuality?

you can't see if you don't open your eyes.

indigenous says

I'm not sure we are as hated as you think.

people pretend to like America if they're making money. eg. mell

could anyone actually LIVE in this horror system where everything is a money making venture referred to as Libertarianism? absolutely not, but they have you wonking away while they turn the country into their property where it was once your home.

mell says

Putin may be out now and there seems to be a slight recent slowdown amid continued inflationary forces, but I'd still call this a heck of an economic track record

he doesnt have to deal with environmentalists when they are putting the oil pipline into europe. russias GDP all driven by natural resources.

Reality says

Who would be doing that limiting for you?

Some might say "we the people."

Reality says

That is a silly point to make . . . as silly as saying many people are born prettier than others. Big fricking deal. Do we need "beauty equalization"?

Ok, so you don't have a problem with aristocracy. But many people do, including myself.

thomaswong.1986 says

he doesnt have to deal with environmentalists when they are putting the oil
pipline into europe. russias GDP all driven by natural resources.

I'm not sure the residents of Chelyabinsk and Chernobyl share your disdain for environmentalists. Do you really want to include Russia in your passive-aggressive musings about environmentalists?

MershedPerturders says

what this suggests however is a question none of us are willing to ponder:
what ethnicity constitutes the nation?

ultimately, it's about survival. When you subtract all these silly notions of
wealth and innovation, you are left with the issue of FAMILY, and family leads
to TRIBE. What tribe do you belong to? it will be a far more important question
than it is today.

Well Charles Manson believed that race war was inevitable .... he turned out to be dead wrong on this issue. In general, I don't see tribe strife happening in america. In essence, this is what "american exceptionalism" is all about - not seeing yourself and others as part of specific tribes like they do in eastern europe and middle east for example. In fact, many people precisely came to america to get away from this primitive bullshit.

dublin hillz says

In fact, many people precisely came to america to get away from this primitive bullshit.

most people came to america to make money lawlessly so they can bring money to their tribe back home.

so far the American experiment hasn't worked without borrowing massively on the future.

freak80 says

Ok, so you don't have a problem with aristocracy. But many people do, including myself.

I don't have a problem with inherited wealth per se.

I do have a problem with people selling (or leasing) me the commons they've claimed for themselves.

That's the fundamental injustice, something John Locke nailed a long time ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockean_proviso

mell says

(who determines how much which land is worth, politicians

highest bidder more or less (there's an infinite amount of issues to be hashed out with LVT -- tax abatements for land-intensive but valued uses, security of tenancy for people as they age, etc)

they key thing is that a given plot's economic value is very dependent on its zoning, so how things gets zoned is the true determinant of prices.

Bellingham Bill says

freak80 says

Ok, so you don't have a problem with aristocracy. But many people do, including myself.

I don't have a problem with inherited wealth per se.

I do have a problem with people selling (or leasing) me the commons they've claimed for themselves.

That's the fundamental injustice, something John Locke nailed a long time ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockean_proviso

give me an example of something that wasn't 'commons'

MershedPerturders says

so far the American experiment hasn't worked without borrowing massively on the future.

What a dumbass comment. It has worked better than any other "experiment" in history. Especially before your socialist vermin sunk their claws into the economy about 100yr ago.