Dead Horse Interchange

RAPEMAN wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 29, 2021 11:53 pm

FTFY

Well neither is wrong. They're either selfish greedy narcs who don't care about anybody but themselves and therefore don't want children to come in and take away all the attention from themselves, and this bodes poorly for how they'll run a country. Or else they're perfectly aware that what they're doing is wrong and will ruin many lives and don't want to have children who will suffer the consequences of their stupid and thoughtless actions.

Either way, I don't trust a politician who doesn't have kids.

RAPEMAN wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 29, 2021 11:53 pm

Do you think half the gen-x/millennial fags who claim it is cruel to bring children into this world is being altruistic or are doing so for the very reasons I give you.

It depends who we're talking about. Trust fund brats? Yeah, they're selfish greedy, degenerate hedonists. But regular Joe Schmoe Gen-X or Millennial? Their lives are shit, they don't have anywhere close to the resources their boomer parents did. Many of them can't afford to have children, even if they wanted to.

Guest wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 30, 2021 12:42 am

Their lives are shit, they don't have anywhere close to the resources their boomer parents did. Many of them can't afford to have children, even if they wanted to.

People before the Boomer Industrial Complex had kids that could outnumber a hockey team. There is always a way in life to have kids, you just get by, you don't have expendable cash.

RAPEMAN wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 30, 2021 12:52 am

People before the Boomer Industrial Complex had kids that could outnumber a hockey team.

Cost of living back then, and standard of living, was much lower. People also had a lot of kids because many of them wouldn't survive to adulthood.

Can Finland become the only collector of the EU stimulus package? In addition to Finland, seven member states are still considering their final answer Yle news

This whole EU stimulus package is completely ridiculous. Economic revitalization as a means of improving the economy has always been a bad idea in general. Economic revitalization is about moving money from one place to another. To do this, money is either created more or borrowed from where it is. Both of these actions come at a price. As the state creates more money, the value of money decreases because there is suddenly more of it, but there are still as many things to buy as before. So this is a direct tax on the money saved. Government borrowing, on the other hand, means an increase in taxes in general, now or in the future.

For example, in order to finance loans for the EU's stimulus package, companies will be taxed in particular. From this we come to the core idea of ​​revitalization, which is that the state knows how to invest better than private actors. This idea is fiction. If there are a lot of profitable investments in the world, private operators will find them. State action in the economy has always been and will always be less efficient and less innovative than private ones. It is because individuals invest their own money, the state invests the money of others.

The idea of ​​the state as an efficient and skilled economic actor is at the heart of socialism. Socialism has never worked or brought wealth and well-being to people. Public “revitalization” is based on the same principles and is therefore an absurd idea.

It's not about economic efficiency, it's about keeping muh jerbs. Which is somewhat understandable, I guess, you don't want millions of people to be suddenly displaced from the economic life of the country, that's exactly the kind of stuff that tends to cause civil wars. The main problem with it is both an erroneous understanding of economics (Keynesians literally think that more inflation =more jobs created) and chronic state corruption and inefficiency. Most of the money ends up on the pocket of useless bureaucrats that should be hanging from lampposts.

Understandable doesn't mean a whole lot. I think most interested parties understand. But it's not good.

Cool beans, you've pumped up Poland to financial viability on the dime of Germany, Norway and France. But you still have Romania and Bulgaria that you won't accomplish that shit with, all the while those states wreck your local workforce pay to shit.

Le Redditeur wrote: ↑

Wed May 05, 2021 11:04 pm

The main problem with it is both an erroneous understanding of economics (Keynesians literally think that more inflation =more jobs created) and chronic state corruption and inefficiency.

Assuming the multiplier is greater than one, every coin invested by the state in a downturn would bring multiple profits in relation to a situation where the state would not stimulate. Studies have however repeatedly shown that the multiplier is actually one or less than one. In the long run, it is difficult to directly measure the loss, but it is likely to become very significant as projects planned with private savings are postponed.

Trouble in paradise. A Ryanair machine flying over Belarus on its way from Greece to Lithuania good intercepted by the Belarus airforce and forced to land.
This was all because of a totally real bomb threat, of course. That a blogger who Lukaschenko personally declared an enemy of the state was on board was just a funny coincidence.
He'll probably get away with this because the EU is, well, the EU.

So far he isn't getting away with it. Belarusian planes are being denied access to their neighbour's airspace and EU planes are avoiding flying over Belarussia.

Macron slapped

Add this to Cuntmala getting heckled in Guatemala and it's a bad day for globalist politicians