Slashdot Mirror
'World of Warcraft' Game Currency Now Worth More Than Venezuelan Money (theblaze.com)
schwit1 quotes TheBlaze:
Digital gold from Blizzard's massive multiplayer online game "World of Warcraft" is worth more than actual Venezuelan currency, the bolivar, according to new data. Venezuelan resident and Twitter user @KalebPrime first made the discovery July 14 and tweeted at the time that on the Venezuela's black market -- now the most-used method of currency exchange within Venezuela according to NPR -- you can get $1 for 8493.97 bolivars. Meanwhile, a "WoW" token, which can be bought for $20 from the in-game auction house, is worth 8385 gold per dollar. According to sites that track the value of both currencies, KalebPrime's math is outdated, and WoW gold is now worth even more than the bolivar.
That tweet has since gone viral, prompting @KalebPrime to joke that "At this rate when I publish my novel the quotes will read 'FROM THE GUY THAT MADE THE WOW GOLD > VENEZUELAN BOLIVAR TWEET.'"
That tweet has since gone viral, prompting @KalebPrime to joke that "At this rate when I publish my novel the quotes will read 'FROM THE GUY THAT MADE THE WOW GOLD > VENEZUELAN BOLIVAR TWEET.'"
and oil industries are already salivating over this
Love the left feel the bern! And if you disagree you'll get beat up today... imprisoned and killed tomorrow. For the people!
Really? I know the old saying that even a broken clock is right twice a day. But you couldn't come up with a more legit source than glen beck's propaganda rag?
Try:
http://fortune.com/2017/08/01/...
Imagine all the people...
Widespread desperation and misery in the country with the richest oil reserves in Latin America. Everyone is poor (except the leaders) and it's all the fault of the CIA (or whoever it's convenient to blame this time). And yet, no matter how many times it brings disaster, some people keep believing stories about how spending others' money instead of earning their own will work out good for them.
small beginnings.. sing along.. https://www.youtube.com/results?sp=EgIIA1AU&q=baltimore+ceasefire
Blame capitalism and corporations all you want. The reality, however, is that there's an extraordinarily high correlation between leftism and failed economies. We shouldn't be surprised by this. Leftism is inherently incompatible with the efficient allocation of resources. When resources are inefficiently allocated then we see a partial or total collapse of the economy in question. This isn't even something that can be fixed. The leftist ideology of taking from the capable and giving to the inept will always lead to disaster. Sometimes it's a quick economic disaster. Sometimes it's a long, drawn out economic disaster. But whatever the timeline, the end result when leftism is involved is economic disaster.
We can add Venezuela to the list of many other failed leftist economies, including that of the USSR, those of the former Eastern Bloc, those of most other South and Central American countries, Greece, Spain, and now even countries like Italy and France. Once the economies of Italy and France eventually fail, the economies of Germany and Sweden likely won't be far behind.
Unless you can then resell the token for real world currency, good, or services (not limited to some video game which most of the world does not value at all) then the headline is only true for a very small subset of people.
Inheritance is the sincerest form of nepotism.
Insert socialist, communist, or dictatorial regime and you got yourself articles for YEARS!
Wheel of Time: Book by Book and Sumview (summary review) Bigdady92 style: http://bigdady92.blogspot.com/
This 'news' means absolutely nothing.
The individual UNITS are worth more. But the units are arbitrary and a comparison between units has nothing to do with the value of the currency itself. You can say a single WoW gold is worth more than a Peso, or a cent, or a Rupee, or a Yuan, or whatever you want. It means nothing.
This would explain all the Venezuelan hotties performing on chaturbate.com I guess. In a few years will it graduate to being a sex-tourist destination? Viva la revolucion.
Notice the FAKE NEWS method Slashdot uses to get anti-venezuela coverage on Slashdot.
Now consider that the biggest news story of the week is the US government ordering the PARDONING of the 4 mercenaries responsible for one of the worst atrocities in Human History. And how hell will freeze over before zionists like the owners of Slashdot will bring this evil state of affairs to your attention.
And before the usual war-mongering Clinton voting scum claim the four haven't been 'pardoned'- the legal machinations that have thrown out their convictions are identical to those seen with the US soldiers responsible for the My Lai holocaust in Vietnam. Those soldiers too were apparently given a trial, found guilt, and imprisoned. But behnd the scenes, the origibal trial and conviction was just for show- and a rapid 'appeals' process ensured ZERO jail time, and a pardoned status a few years later for all involved.
Zionists control the media so they control the handful of headlines you see each day. Perfect censorship by OMMISSION. Them they attack the 1% of true independent media outlets outside their control- and suggest their existence is a 'threat' to 'democracy'. Of course the masters of 1984 Groupthink know the very principle of groupthink is ruined if people have even one outlet telling the truth.
Slashdot will use the covert scoring system here to mostly hide this post, for instance. Their admin can score any post to -1. The zionists would love to 'score' the media outlets outside their control to '-1' as well.
The zionist horrors will refer to coverage of the Blackwater story on some more 'grown-up' zionist controlled media outlets as 'proof' that the story wasn't hidden. Bullsh-t! It is an ancient trick that 'difficult' matters of public record have to have some minor, buried, reporting in a place only the self-informed ever read anyway. To do less would be to fatally raise suspicion.
No- it is about which stories get promoted. Saudi Arabia is the most abusive and terror supporting regime on the planet- with a violent dictatorship as bad as any in Human History. You won't see Saudi Arabia bashed on Slashdot, cos Saudi Arabia is a main ally of the USA and Israel. The US Congress has no morals or principles, and would abolish the US constitution if it could. So when the US government bashes another nation on 'moral' grounds, you know the real agenda is pure evil- and the people spreading the propaganda are pure evil as well.
Can you define "leftism"? Some of the most successful economies in the world could be defined as "leftists" if you include social Democrat nations like Sweden and Germany.
The Chavista regime certainly can be defined as leftist, but a more accurate description would be a kleptocracy.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Did you even read that comment before you replied to it? It already answers your questions, before you even asked them!
Since you're apparently unable to read that comment on your own, I'll extract the relevant parts for you, with some emphasis added:
Redistribution has been part of governing systems since the beginning. Your libertarianism is a fantasy that would lead to revolution. What counts is sustainable redistribution.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Sweden and Germany: the world leaders into turning themselves into sharia shitholes in the self imposed eu rapeugee crisis. What proud shining examples.
36 retweets is now considered "viral"?
How a basically rich country can be driven utterly into the ground by massive mismanagement. Leads me to believe that it all comes down to the people and who they put in charge. As long as people do not start to wise up, we will continue have catastrophes like that. Not that what is going on in the US, the UK or the eastern parts of the EU is any better: Stupid people that believe stupid promises by utterly evil politicians.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Germany? "leftist"? We talking about the same country that lead the war in EU to impose strict neoliberal policies on countries like Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Ireland?
I think we have really lost the meaning of words this days.....
But then they'd have to kill you.
There was an article a while back about Ultima Online gold being worth more than the Viatnamese Dong. Of course, that was more about an increase in the value of fantasy currency, whereas this is about the bolivar becoming a fantasy currency. Also everyone says the Dong has been performing well. It has consistently grown as it matures.
"Venezuelan Money Now Worth Less Than 'World of Warcraft' Game Currency".
that's the problem with Venezuela, they play WOW instead of working lol...
it's the other way around, you lazy bastards...
However neither Germany nor Sweden or other Scandinavian countries would consider themselves "left".
That is just a stupid american label.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Leftism is the idea that government can be used to solve practically any problem. Are there people who are hungry and can't get food? Create a government food stamp program. Are there people who can't afford housing? Create a government Housing and Urban Development department to build a government housing project. The list goes on and on, from electricity, phones, communications, medical care, schools, jobs, transportation, and almost anything else of which you can think. Most always, Leftism does not involve any free market solution. Instead, the preferred method is to tax those who are working, and then redistribute it to Leftists' constituents, thus weakening any opposition to the left, and creating a voting base dependent on politicians for.... everything!
Neither Sweden, nor Germany became prosperous prior to instituting a Leftist agenda. As a reminder, East Germany collapsed, while capitalist West Germany was the prosperous nation.
Almost all Leftists are Klepotocrats. Very few have ideas other than "tax and spend". Of the few which are not, most of them focus instead on regulation because they realize that they have reached the upper limits of taxation without collapsing their economies. However, at its core is still the idea of a government solution, for which high taxes are a prerequisite.
And he's not talking about redistribution in general. Some aid is necessary in civilization. But when you get the leftist insanity disease, poverty and collapse for all is not far behind.
The Roman empire failed because the productive minority were being taxed to death to give bread to the lazy.
The value of a currency unit is not interesting. Is the total value of WoW money more than that of Venezuelan money? That would be somewhat more interesting (though, still, WoW money is sort of global money, Venezuelan money is not).
Yet another socialist economy down the tubes. Even worse because they are resource rich. This will put the kibosh on the socialist "revolutionaries" that infest capitalist economies for a generation or two. Venezuelans have taken one for the team (mankind). Sean Penn and Danny Glover are, I hope, over-medicated due to being in a severe depression.
If no, then it has no value.
Perhaps you should review a little history as to why the kinds of redistribution in place today came about.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Because people left to their own devices are greedy lazy slobs. Hunger is a strong motivator but when you take that away, they become lazy trash.
Nah. They are much more useful as pawns chanting the beliefs they got from someone else. Nuanced thought is over rated.
Germany? "leftist"?
By European standards, Germany is economically conservative. But compared to America, Germany is "leftist". Like most people, Americans use themselves as the reference point. Plenty of Americans believe their own government to be leftist.
> Very few have ideas other than "tax and spend".
As opposed to their opponents' philosophy of "don't tax and spend anyway".
Neither Sweden, nor Germany became prosperous prior to instituting a Leftist agenda.
Germany was the first country to implement modern state socialism, including healthcare, pensions, disability, and support for families with children, beginning in 1883 under the guidance of that bleeding heart liberal Chancellor Otto von Bismark. At the time, German per capita income was a tiny fraction of what it is today.
An example of "leftism" you forgot to list would be taxing the citizens to bail out failed investments by corporations. Oh wait!
Wonder who is the "kleptocrat".
The Roman empire failed because the productive minority were being taxed to death to give bread to the lazy.
Actually, it was the productive majority who were being forced off their land so that the wealthy could have wine and olives.
See the Latifunda.
Add in corruption, a lack of other civilizations to plunder, and plagues, and you have problems.
Leftism is the idea that government can be used to solve practically any problem.
That's not correct, but let's go with this for now. By extension then, "rightism" would be the idea that the free market can be used to solve practically any problem. Let's see how this solves the problems you posted:
Are there people who are hungry and can't get food?
They have to offer something to the free market; otherwise they can't buy food for themselves or their children. If they can't offer something (maybe they're sick, too young, lack skills, or maybe the market isn't in a great state) they starve and the problem solves itself - no more hungry people!
Are there people who can't afford housing?
The free market solves this problem easily: homeless people can either die or, as an alternative be jailed in for-profit prisons for loitering, sleeping under bridges, and so on. Either solution solves the homeless problem in a nice market-driven way.
Do you really think the free-market solutions to your problems are better?
Almost all Leftists are Klepotocrats.
That's... rather silly. You may as well say almost all rightists are oligarchists, and they long to be led by a handful of billionaires - who are obviously their betters, or else they wouldn't be billionaires, now would they?
To be fair, von Bismarck (it's an old name and predates the modern "mark" spelling) intended to suppress socialists that way.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
Socialism sucks. No matter how it's tried, no matter when, no matter where. There is no perfect form of socialism, or communism, or any form of leftism. Ever. It all sucks and it all falls apart at the seams.
You can hate free markets and capitalism all you want. But it's the least worst system of economics that we know. You haven't yet figured out a better system.
... by now my toenails are probably more worth than Venezuelan money. No surprise here to be honest.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Clearly Venezuelans need to get better gear so they can do the better raids.
To be fair, von Bismarck (it's an old name and predates the modern "mark" spelling) intended to suppress socialists that way.
Of course. I was being sarcastic when I called him a liberal. But the reasons for his policies are not what is important. What is important is that they worked. Germany was socially stable and prospered. In fact, they did so well that by 1914 the Germans felt they could fight the whole world and win.
The disutility of labor is instinctual. This isn't a vice, it is a survival strategy that seeks to conserve scarce resources (energy) by not expending it when it is not necessary. And it is part of all of us (though the particulars DO vary).
On the upside, people who's lives are full of ease tend not to breed. So, as ironic as it seems, free distribution of food is a great plan for reducing the population (if that is one's goal).
But, more importantly, socialist economies fail because they don't properly incite labor. And, without such incentives, people don't labor. That is simple, and there is a just-as-simple solution.
Robots! They love working. The more we automate labor, the more we empower ourselves to have a utopian society where we live off the efforts of the perfect slave race (a race of machines that love being slaves). Actually getting there will involve some social upheaval...people are slow to adapt their idologies to suit a new technological landscape after all. But we will get there, eventually. We all want it too badly (though many will reject that because they reject their imagined horror that results from their inability to adapt their ideologies).
Leftism is the idea that government can be used to solve practically any problem.
That's not correct, but let's go with this for now. By extension then, "rightism" would be the idea that the free market can be used to solve practically any problem. Let's see how this solves the problems you posted:
Are there people who are hungry and can't get food?
They have to offer something to the free market; otherwise they can't buy food for themselves or their children. If they can't offer something (maybe they're sick, too young, lack skills, or maybe the market isn't in a great state) they starve and the problem solves itself - no more hungry people!
The government must provide food.
Are there people who can't afford housing?
The free market solves this problem easily: homeless people can either die or, as an alternative be jailed in for-profit prisons for loitering, sleeping under bridges, and so on. Either solution solves the homeless problem in a nice market-driven way.
Do you really think the free-market solutions to your problems are better?
The government must provide housing.
Almost all Leftists are Klepotocrats.
That's... rather silly. You may as well say almost all rightists are oligarchists, and they long to be led by a handful of billionaires - who are obviously their betters, or else they wouldn't be billionaires, now would they?
The government must prevent the acquisition of wealth.
What were you saying about leftists and the government?
Most American officials are more authoritarian and to the right then anything. There are a few Democrats that are still quite left, but most are mostly center-ish. On the right you got a few that are almost near the center to those all the way to the right.
Most are definitely authoritarian regardless if they are lefties or righties. That's more scary then the left or right aspects of them. They all believe big government is the only answer. They all love this one world order idea as if it would ever really work.
Not until you boil all culture down to one will we ever get along. We are tribalism to our core.
It's important to remember that "socialism" (public ownership of resources and the means of production) is not NECESSARILY synonymous with "leftism" (belief in equality of outcome, etc).
There IS one scenario where non-leftist socialism can (and does) work: when the country
a) Has substantial, valuable natural resources with a large, robust international market, and
b) Is willing and able to limit the ability of "outsiders" to become citizens with an equal right to their share of those resources.
By almost any observational definition, Saudi Arabi is a de-facto socialist state... every Saudi citizen, as a matter of birthright, is eligible to receive tens of thousands of dollars per year from the Saudi government. Free money. With bonuses for things like giving birth to a Saudi child, getting married, etc. Ditto, for countries like Kuwait, Bahrain, and other oil-rich countries.
Norway is similar. Norwegians pay high taxes, but they also get a metric crap-ton of free services (on top of a generous social welfare system) to make up for it. Just check out the new road tunnels that have gotten built throughout Oslo (and elsewhere in Norway) over the past 20 years or so. Those roads were STAGGERINGLY expensive to build, but are really awesome if you're living in Norway. By American standards, even *poor* Norwegian citizens are pretty damn affluent. HOWEVER... the need to limit eligibility for social welfare services is a major reason why Norway can't join the EU. If it joined the EU and retained the same social welfare system it has now, two things would happen within 20 years: a) Norway's population would explode to 100 million, and b) Norway wouldn't be able to profitably extract and sell enough oil to maintain those benefits, and its ability to fund them would eventually collapse.
Imagine, for a moment, if the US Government, which currently owns most of the land in Alaska, were to go into overdrive and start profitably drilling for oil everywhere in Alaska it could. It might destroy Alaska's natural environment, but it would also mean that anyone who was born or naturalized as a US citizen would get a few thousand dollars per month for free... augmented by a veritable army of guestworkers who could never become American citizens, but would end up doing the jobs Americans had no incentive to do themselves. Imagine an America where even a (relatively) poor (but American) family could afford to own a house, pay immigrants to do their yardwork, and live in a neighborhood with the look & feel of a wealthy gated community... a gated community that NEEDED those gates, to keep them safe from the shantytown packed with dirt-poor immigrant guestworkers on the other side (kind of like any big city in Latin America, where you have skyscrapers with million-dollar residences that LITERALLY have tin-roofed shacks sprawling for 5 miles behind them on the other side of the parking garage).
In this case, "socialism" != "leftism" -- Saudis might be de-facto SOCIALIST, but there's little public support for expanding the number of Saudi citizens, or improving the lives of Saudi Arabia's guest workers. An average Saudi might feel a bit of distaste for treating foreigners like shit, but would instantly draw the line at doing anything that might reduce THEIR OWN way of life and standard of living.
It's no less valid than your labels.
It doesn't matter how you define yourself because you'll always perceive yourself as more perfect than the next guy. That's just how humans are.
The alternative is people dying in the street. Which if you are okay with that, I will respect that at least as a consistent political principle, but let's do be quite clear about what is being advocated here.
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
I KNow! Since Obama was elected look at what happened to the USA!!! ... oh wait a minute?
Sorry enough right wing rhetoric. All of scary and evil socialist Europe is not turning into Venezuela either so your argument is mute
http://saveie6.com/
...World of Warcraft is far more stable than Venezuela today.
-Styopa
Math really doesn't care whether the country is "right" or "left". If you spectacularly over-spend, stifle economic activity, actively undermine private economic activity, and on top of that fail to diversify your economy while constantly pocketing money for yourself and your cronies, your economy and country is going to have a bad day. Using a "right" or "left" style of politics doesn't make you immune to corruption and gross mismanagement of that sort.
There's nothing obviously wrong with a little socialism. That's why most countries in the world have "socialized" government-funded militaries, emergency services, judiciary, and many other services. Compared to the 18th or 19th century, supposed "right wing" governments of today are flagrantly "socialist". The bar for what's in the middle has shifted greatly. On the other hand, you're right that taken to the extreme, socialist policies become self-destructive and are prone to the same kind of abuses as the worst of the right-wing "free market" governments ignoring all but the concerns of the very wealthy. Once you cross that line from merely taxing and supporting services for the common good into actively taking personal property and stifling any investment that isn't government, you're on the road to economic ruin.
You might even be correct that "leftism" is more correlated with failed economies than extreme laissez-faire economies, but would people actually want to live in the latter if 99% of people are almost slaves? There's more to measure here than merely the strength of the economy. If most people aren't benefiting from it and are barely able to subsist, I don't think they care if it is because of "leftist" or "rightist" mismanagement and lack of compassion.
Nobody wants to go back to the 18th or 19th century when child labor, literal slavery, and unsafe work conditions were the norm because the economic powers-that-be could get away with it without strong government regulation placing some limits. A sensible evaluation acknowledges that a balance between these extremes is best, and saving your derision purely for one "side" of those political extremes is silly. Fact is, the worst right-wing, laissez-faire type economies simply went extinct historically because they treated most people like crap so people changed them. Those sorts of economies only truly persist mainly in what is commonly referred to as the "developing world", yet there are people today who for some strange reason want to turn the clock back a century or two by forced "deregulation". No, there's a balance to strike. You can argue about where it should be, but placing all the blame and concern on the "left" side of things is neglecting the well-known dangers of robber-barons and the like.
The human race is just in between civilization ending wars at the moment. There has been a war of one kind or another being fought everyday some where on the planet. Humans have been fighting one another ever since there were enough humans running around to pick a side and fight for bigger caves and prettier woman. The only problem is that unlike all the wars fought over the centuries we are now armed with weapons capable of killing everything on the planet in record time and with little effort. Sitting behind a weapons control station pushing buttons is easier than running across a field with a spear in one hand and a sword in the other.
Remember who you're talking to, MM.
You are welcome on my lawn.
All economies fail when their roots are infected, with people losing regard for the ideas that sparked them in the process, even with excess. An economy propped by automation likely shares the same achilles heel. I think robots solve a ton of issues, but they don't guarantee confidence, civility, loyalty, morality, etc. even if they're built to eliminate a field of targets in a blink of an eye. Still yet, I'm pretty sure large scale adoption will force people to rethink all kinds of absurdities we're witness to now.
In latinamerica Leftist is a term almost as undervalued as conservative in the Trump era.
Now please pull your pants up and exit in an orderly fashion.
I'm normally good with understanding markets when they are free, but not so good with manipulated ones. Can someone explain how this relates to the official exchange rate:
http://www.xe.com/currencychar...
The official exchange rate appears to be pegged to the USD. How is it then that people are spending so many bolivars for $1. Do people not honour the exchange rate? Does the government refuse to cover the value of it?
How can this "official" exchange rate not reflect what the currency is actually worth, with the subquestion of how can an official exchange rate be official if it isn't honoured?
Lmfao. Yes. The lazy, those stuck in a caste they couldn't get out of because they weren't a land owner.
You guys need some fucking history lessons.
Can you define "leftism"? Some of the most successful economies in the world could be defined as "leftists" if you include social Democrat nations like Sweden and Germany.
Don't be ridiculous - of course someone who throws around the term "leftism" in that manner can't adequately articulate what it means. Present day Venezuela is no more an evolved and truly Marxist state than were the Soviet "socialist" republics, which were also more like the a "kleptocracy." "Leftism" is typically used to refer to ill-fated attempts to institute communism, which has never existed in the pure, altruistic, governmental end state that itself evolves into a mutually beneficial pseudo-anarchy.
The Soviets may have cited Marx as an inspiration but they did not follow his guidance, and what we have now in Venezuela is just a chaotic, budding dictatorship. I'd argue that Sweden is further left than is Maduro, though the Swedes have thus far been able to maintain control of their government and made it work for them, and they are generally happy because their socialistic ways are working for them. Maduro is not instituting socialism or so-called communism, he's a crook in way over his head, plain and simple.
This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
What happened in Venezuela is a result of market forces and has very little to do with "left" or "right" ideology. The concept is known as "Dutch Disease", and is relatively simple. As an oil-rich nation with little else going for it, the market-optimal use for Venezuela's labor is in the oil industry. Without the government making a regulatory effort to keep the economy diversified, it became entirely dependent on oil revenue (and everything else including food was imported from other countries with that oil revenue). When the oil prices tanked, so went the entire economy. They could've anticipated this and raised taxes (on gas in particular) to subsidize domestic production of food and other necessities, but the populist idiots were all too proud of their 2 cents/l gasoline.
The Chavista regime certainly can be defined as leftist
They are leftist in the sense that they claim to be motivated by social equality and egalitarianism and have adopted policies, flawed though they may be, in support of collective ownership of the means of production. These values and policies would put them closer to those who sat on the left side of the Estates General during the French Revolution, which is the origin of the terms left and right. Of course, because the Chavistas and the so-called Bolivarian Revolution have become so unsavory and nasty under President Maduro, the left has tried to distance themselves from them, ala the "no True Scotsman" fallacy, but the fact remains that the Chavista regime is leftist, in word and deed, and identify themselves with the left. To suggest otherwise is nonsense.
So are you stupid or lazy?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politics
Whoa. that was hard.
You mean those two places with Rape numbers higher than their GDP? GREAT examples...
I think you mean:"Spend and let the Democrats do the taxation bit twice; before and after the spending".
Disclaimer: I have no preference as history later only shows an alternation of spending and taxation anyway.
Point is they are in no way left. Germany us right now ruled by a big coalation, CDU, a conservative right party and SPD, a slightly left from the center party.
The countries you mention have strong social nets, that does not make them left.
It is just your label and in comparission to countries that have 'left' parties or even governments completely missleading.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
"True Socialism just hasn't been tried yet"?
BINGO!
I know this will engender rage from these forums, but something is generally overlooked when talking about the unusual success of leftist European countries compared to what is generally observed. The socialist countries work where the others in say, South America, fail because they are able to piggy back off of the United States.
These countries have to pay abnormally low amounts of the GDP for defense, despite having large and potentially hostile neighbors. It is easy to be a Swedish pacisifist when someone else's blood and treasure is ensuring that you do not speak Russian.
The technology that gives these countries a better standard of living is usually paid and developed by other nations. For example, by shifting the cost of developing new medicines and procedures elsewhere, more money is available to raise the internal standards. The United States alone pays for about 44% of the world's medical research cost.
https://www.usnews.com/news/ar...
If you read the article, there is a subtle warning not made by the authors. Before the disastrous affordable care act, the U.S. proportion of medical research was 57% in 2007. As more socialist policies were adopted, an incredible decline in activity soon followed. It should be noted this was not accidental, as can be clearly understood by anyone who actually read the law. There are several policies inherent in the bill that create this as an expected outcome.
This is important to note because this is not only true in medicine but many other areas of science. For all its failings, the capitalist model in the U.S. has been the engine that has been driving the success of Western Civilization for the last 70 years. As this engine slows down, the benefits it provided will decrease too.
Another interesting allegory can be found in the article. As China becomes more capitalistic, it's proportion of R.D spending has increased dramatically. While China likes to style itself as socialist country, this is mostly lip-service used to keep continuity in governance. Any casual visit to the country or even cursory reading shows abundant signs that China is quickly becoming the center of capitalism in the world. They have learned the lessons that we have lost and are benefiting immensely from it.
In any case, this also does not bode well for the European socialist countries. The United States due to tradition, heritage, and world view has generally lead to favorably treaties when dealing with trade, defense, and the sharing of technology. However, China is not burdened with any such preconceptions. China is very willing to keep core technology to itself for the benefits of its citizens. It is very willing to make sure that dealings with outside nations lead to its direct benefit. Or, to put it in a way more in tune with the slashdot mind, a country that bans youtube and limits the number of foreign movies that are released in a year to bolster its own film industry is not going to share its biotech.
I guess I am trying to say is be careful of what you wish for. Enlightened socialism is by far the best way to live. We all know this because we have ALL lived under such a system. It's called childhood. The parents provide for all our needs. Sure, we do some chores to give back, but overall someone else is paying the bills. The problem with socialism is that, so far, no one has figured out a way to make it truly pay for itself.
"Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
Yepp but the other option aint any better. Ie the free market to solve everything.
If the goverment have all the power or the coperations it will create the same hell with the same people in top. Absoulut power corrupts and the only way is to spread the power and a balance between coperations and goverment.
From Wikipedia:
"The political terms Left and Right were coined during the French Revolution (1789â"1799), referring to the seating arrangement in the Estates General..".
'stupid american label' indeed!
"jailed in for-profit prisons".
Prisons aren't profitable in a completely free market system.
It would have to be a Soylent Green manufacturing facility..
What happened in Venezuela is a result of market forces and has very little to do with "left" or "right" ideology.... As an oil-rich nation with little else going for it, the market-optimal use for Venezuela's labor is in the oil industry.
Little else going for it? Really? How about it being rich with gold and other minerals. It also has rich farmland and a temperate climate, but yet has run out of food. Why? Because the government sets the price for it below the cost of production. No one wants to invest there because they are afraid the government will confiscate it "for the people". It's Socialism you fucking excuse making leftist.
It is true about the rape thing. It is also true that many of those rape cases would not even be considerd rape in the usa for exampel.
You are comparing apples to oranges since the description of rape differ in the laws.
In many countries it would be impossible to get convicted of rape of your own wife. In sweden and germany your wife can report you for rape.
A way broader rape definition leads to more rape cases big suprise
All Raids in Venezuela are canceled because it's nothing but trash drops?
Do not breed?? Man youve not seen the neighborhoods ive seen. Thats all they do.
Leftism does not involve any free market solution
Look at the moon race, one of the greatest examples of the superiority of the free market.
- Indipendent bureaus competing with different projects: FAILED
- Contractors managed by goverment agency NASA: SUCCESS
Leftism is the idea that government can be used to solve practically any problem. Are there people who are hungry and can't get food? Create a government food stamp program. Are there people who can't afford housing? Create a government Housing and Urban Development department to build a government housing project. The list goes on and on, from electricity, phones, communications, medical care, schools, jobs, transportation, and almost anything else of which you can think. Most always, Leftism does not involve any free market solution. Instead, the preferred method is to tax those who are working, and then redistribute it to Leftists' constituents, thus weakening any opposition to the left, and creating a voting base dependent on politicians for.... everything!
Neither Sweden, nor Germany became prosperous prior to instituting a Leftist agenda. As a reminder, East Germany collapsed, while capitalist West Germany was the prosperous nation.
Almost all Leftists are Klepotocrats. Very few have ideas other than "tax and spend". Of the few which are not, most of them focus instead on regulation because they realize that they have reached the upper limits of taxation without collapsing their economies. However, at its core is still the idea of a government solution, for which high taxes are a prerequisite.
This idea that businesses are just collapsing under the burden of taxes and regulation is a ridiculous fiction. Businesses wield stupendous power here in the US - we have an extreme, obscene concentration of wealth.. What we have NOW is a kleptocracy, fully supported by both parties.
We, the electorate, have very real power to address this issue, and many others - issues that, despite appearances, the nation is pretty much unified in its opinion on.
To counteract this, we see propaganda... the stuff your spouting here in your comments, to 1. destroy faith in government, and 2. turn voters on each other.
to some any social net other than "you're on your own, good luck" is Commie Socialism.
Interesting metric there. Most every country's economy has improved since the 19th century.
US economic growth is much, much lower than it was before it instituted social welfare reforms under TR and FDR and the Johnson expansions.