Next Government you Predict your IRL Nation will Have.

[Atlanticatia]

US: Congress will eventually shift back to Democrats. And then it'll go back to Republicans. It's not hard to be a fortune teller when there are only two parties.
NZ: Strong Labour-Green government.

[The Liberated Territories]

"the very ideological rigidity of libertarianism is so ridiculous. They just blatantly assume that all individuals would do whatever is best for society in spite of what is more profitable and in their individualistic interests.

Uh no, in fact most libertarians believe the opposite. What is profitable to the individual is profitable to society. However since egoism is not an absolute virtue, we allow people to donate to charities if they do so desire or find some sort of justification to do (hint: science tells us that the reward part of your brain pops up when you are altruistic).

Yes people need leeway to do business and commerce, not to the extent where fraud is the norm and nothing of actual value is created. There is a balance to strike here, and complete market freedom is not in anyone's best interests.

Mostly because people can't see the forest for the trees, and do not look long term but instead focus so much on a few casualties that are statistically insignificant. Hence we have regulations for shit that has only happened once. Had one guy in 2001 died from a pill that millions others have taken? Better regulate against that. Most people's best interests is living richly even when they are poor, where in America even hobos now have smart phones, and innovation has given us such an advantage that our traditional values can't keep up.

Not even to the corporations themselves.

Exactly. The market is bad news for monopolies.

Such a state will never exist, such a state can never exist. Libertarianism is just this huge clump of stupidity and lack of common sense filled with paradoxes and contradictions with undeniable faith to corporate enterprise which actually hurts them in the long run.

Sure. But it's less faith and more common sense economics.

No nation in the history of the world has existed in libertarian la la land, the best example of laissez faire extremism is Somalia.

You don't know what you are talking about, do you?

Honestly, libertarians are the very epitome of economic idiocy and the perpetuation of free market myths. Yes there are fundamental unchallenged free market principles. No they cannot work without a centralized Government. The Free market works indepdently within a social construct such as a nation and a central government. No independently from it.

The (relatively) free market has worked in America without a centralized government for decades. Try again. Also, I am pretty sure most corporations don't give a damn about the social contract, which is why they are all relocating to Ireland.

It's also funny how they challenge the federal reserve, when it too is a private organization that works independently within the Government. That's a living contradiction of everything a libertarian stands for isn't it? Being against responsible private entities?

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/0 ... rk-part-n/

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Libertarianism

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Austrian_school

http://mises.org/sites/default/files/Ec ... sson_2.pdf

http://www.cblpi.org/ftp/Econ/RoadtoSer ... rsions.pdf

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2 ... serve.aspx

[Anglo-California]

The President will be a Democrat in 2016.

[Caribica]

USA: Not really sure, Hillary has a strong base but a lot of people are tired of the Democrats after Obama, I'm not sure at all about the Senate but I think it's safe to say Republicans will keep the house

[The Liberated Territories]

The President will be a Democrat in 2016.

Maybe if the Reps keep the senate.

[Arkiasis]

Canada: Liberal minority government

[Laerod]

The President will be a Democrat in 2016.

Maybe if the Reps keep the senate.

Highly unlikely. They barely swept the floor in the midterms despite low voter turnout, Democrats defending almost all the seats, and midterms favoring the party in opposition to the President. Despite pretty much only Republicans going to vote, the Senate seat in Virginia remained Democrat. The implication is that the Big Blue Wall has grown to 270 electoral votes.

[Othelos]

USA: in 2016, we will elect a democratic president, and one of the houses switches to democratic majority.

That's assuming nothing extraordinary happens.

[Empire of Vlissingen]

Er stond niet dat ik dat niet mocht zeggen en je bent geen moderator!.

Er staat ''IRL Nation'' niet ''het-land-waar-ik-zou-graag-vandaan-zou-willen-komen''. Het is echter geen probleem ofzo. ^^

Oke I predict PVV will win the next elections in The Netherlands.

[Vecima]

Ireland: Fine Gael/Independents/Greens(MAYBE)
OR
Fine Gael/Fianna Fáil

The next election may be the most interesting since the founding of the state. The left wing parties and Sinn Fein look set to gain massively when compared to the last general election and it may even be the case that Fianna Fail and Fine Gael don't have enough seats combined to form the next government.

I honestly hope Sinn Féin doesn't get into power whatsoever, whether that be a coalition or not. Although the austerity was brutal, the economy is getting better(as a result of worldwide events, not Fine Gael's economic prowess, as reported by RTÉ), I would hate to see this slow progress be ruined by Sinn Féin. They are economically illiterate.

[Grand Britannia]

Republicans gonna take over and we're gonna go back to 10 year occupations and invasions, standard procedure.

[Coia]

US
the Republicans will get 300 seats in the House
And 75 Seats in the senate
And the president be a Republican

[Empire of Vlissingen]

Republicans gonna take over and we're gonna go back to 10 year occupations and invasions, standard procedure.

What do you mean?

[Rhodisia]

Empire under Obama I, the First of His Name, King of Playing the Race Card, White Genocide and Welfare Distribution.

[Belmaria]

Empire under Obama I, the First of His Name, King of Playing the Race Card, White Genocide and Welfare Distribution.

Because three-term preisdencies are possible in 21st century America

[Napkiraly]

Empire under Obama I, the First of His Name, King of Playing the Race Card, White Genocide and Welfare Distribution.

lol wtf?

[Laerod]

Empire under Obama I, the First of His Name, King of Playing the Race Card, White Genocide and Welfare Distribution.

Because three-term preisdencies are possible in 21st century America :palm:

Clearly the biggest error is assuming Barack would use his surname rather than his given name.

[Empire of Vlissingen]

Empire under Obama I, the First of His Name, King of Playing the Race Card, White Genocide and Welfare Distribution.

lol wtf?

I think he watched Fox news too much.

[Greater Istanistan]

You're funny, Rhodisia.

Liberal minority, Conservatives as official opposition, NDP play power brokers and wheel like mad. Bloc dies and its voters go New Democrat.

That's really it.

[Bezombia]

For America.

Another democrat president in 2016. Dems will likely reclaim the Senate in 2016, House could go either way.

[Jinos]

President: Hillary Clinton (Dem)
Senate: Democrat controlled (+10 seats roughly I'm thinking)
House: Hard to say, will be hard for Dems to win it due to GOP gerrymandering.

[Ripoll]

"the very ideological rigidity of libertarianism is so ridiculous. They just blatantly assume that all individuals would do whatever is best for society in spite of what is more profitable and in their individualistic interests.

Uh no, in fact most libertarians believe the opposite. What is profitable to the individual is profitable to society. However since egoism is not an absolute virtue, we allow people to donate to charities if they do so desire or find some sort of justification to do (hint: science tells us that the reward part of your brain pops up when you are altruistic).

Yes people need leeway to do business and commerce, not to the extent where fraud is the norm and nothing of actual value is created. There is a balance to strike here, and complete market freedom is not in anyone's best interests.

Mostly because people can't see the forest for the trees, and do not look long term but instead focus so much on a few casualties that are statistically insignificant. Hence we have regulations for shit that has only happened once. Had one guy in 2001 died from a pill that millions others have taken? Better regulate against that. Most people's best interests is living richly even when they are poor, where in America even hobos now have smart phones, and innovation has given us such an advantage that our traditional values can't keep up.

Not even to the corporations themselves.

Exactly. The market is bad news for monopolies.

Such a state will never exist, such a state can never exist. Libertarianism is just this huge clump of stupidity and lack of common sense filled with paradoxes and contradictions with undeniable faith to corporate enterprise which actually hurts them in the long run.

Sure. But it's less faith and more common sense economics.

No nation in the history of the world has existed in libertarian la la land, the best example of laissez faire extremism is Somalia.

You don't know what you are talking about, do you?

Honestly, libertarians are the very epitome of economic idiocy and the perpetuation of free market myths. Yes there are fundamental unchallenged free market principles. No they cannot work without a centralized Government. The Free market works indepdently within a social construct such as a nation and a central government. No independently from it.

The (relatively) free market has worked in America without a centralized government for decades. Try again. Also, I am pretty sure most corporations don't give a damn about the social contract, which is why they are all relocating to Ireland.

It's also funny how they challenge the federal reserve, when it too is a private organization that works independently within the Government. That's a living contradiction of everything a libertarian stands for isn't it? Being against responsible private entities?

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/0 ... rk-part-n/

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Libertarianism

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Austrian_school

http://mises.org/sites/default/files/Ec ... sson_2.pdf

http://www.cblpi.org/ftp/Econ/RoadtoSer ... rsions.pdf

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2 ... serve.aspx

1) Which is wrong, what is best for an individual may or may not be good for society. That's the most retarded generalization ever made. An example of this is cod fishing in Canada. Once a productive and affluent enterprise, the lack of regulations on how many fish you can obtain at a time ruined the sea life and has thus left the cod industry in Canada non existent. Why? Because individual corporations are not always rational economic actors. They are unable to think in long term cycles and hardly self regulate themselves to be sustainable over a long amount of time. What happened in Canada harmed the entire industry, CEOs, Workers, managers and all. The Government is there to protect the people from their own irrationality. As elitist and snobby as it sounds it's 100% true. Government should never take up the role of a corporation, that's the farthest von misses has ever gotten to a rational thought. I'm not denying how much von mises contributed to the field of economics, but to the extent he criticizes Government activities and advocates for completely unrestrained free market fallacies is absolutely ridiculous.

2) Of course, because deforestation, over hunting, and climate change only happen once right?

3) The free market when COMPLETELY left to it's own devices self destructs itself. It sacrifices the long term interests of THEIR OWN industries in exchange for maximizing profit in the short term.

4) Anti trust laws and various regulations implemented by teddy and FDR prevented monopolies from occurring. Standard oil was allowed to occur at a time period with the lowest amount of Government regulation. The traditional neo-liberal train of thought would be "hue, government bailouts and subsidizing are legal monopolies!" Bailouts of large financial structures whose collapse would ultimately cripple the rest of the market are just common sense. They are not monopolies because they do have competition. There is not one industry in the US that only has a single company. Not one.

5) "you don't know what you're talking about do you?" No substance, no argument, no credibility.

6) The US has NEVER been a laissez faire economy. Not even since the foundation of our nation. Saying so is tea partiest hog wash and just plain false.

I'll leave you off with a quote that I believe applies to you.

"It's impossible to make a post on the Internet about the financial crisis, or even anything economic in general, without being bombarded by "Peter Schiff was right!! videos. For the new Austrians (i.e., 19-year-olds who read a few newsletters over at the von Mises Institute and think they have achieved enlightenment), the Austrian-influenced investor Peter Schiff's prediction of the housing bubble was vindication of all things Austrian. They believed they had finally shown all other economic theories to be utterly bankrupt and discredited. This is massively ironic for a number of reasons. First, Peter Schiff is still horrifically wrong about many things. Second, Austrians have continuously predicted the economic end times and Weimar-style hyper-inflation as they will never be satisfied with the American economy until all regulation is lifted, the Fed is abolished, and we return to a gold standard. Only then will doom be averted. Of course, it's easy to be a Cassandra when all you predict is doom. (In short, even a stopped clock can be right twice a day.)
Third, they overlook the metric buttload of economists and financial guys who also saw it coming. Those guys just weren't put on CNBC alongside the Wall Street cheerleaders. Even one of Dubya's own economic advisers, Greg Mankiw, warned of problems at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac back in 2003. Hell, firms like Goldman Sachs were shorting their own securities — the bubble was apparently not a big mystery to insiders.
Fourth, the Austrians claim that their immutable laws of economics are not "scientific" in the sense that they are not empirically derived like the laws of physics, and thus are not subject to falsification and do not make predictions, but "illustrate history" (whatever that means). Yet they are now claiming victory over finally making a correct and falsifiable prediction! That sound you hear is the sound of every sane economist's head exploding."

This is all libertarians were every good for - "The founder of the Austrian school, Carl Menger, along with William Stanley Jevons and Leon Walras, was responsible for starting the Marginal Revolution in the 19th century, an important step forward in economic thinking. Ludwig von Mises is credited with introducing the economic calculation problem in the 1920s, which argued that a state-run economy could not be efficient because prices could not be "known," only decided by the state. Austrians also argued for the non-neutrality of money. In 1974, Hayek shared the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences (with Gunnar Myrdal) for his "pioneering work in the theory of money and economic fluctuations and ... penetrating analysis of the interdependence of economic, social and institutional phenomena."

The school hasn't produced anything of much value since then. Now they are primarily a small group of cranks funded by even richer cranks through the von Mises Institute looking for self-serving rationalizations couched in the form of economic theory.

Also the most prosperous time of the American economy was in the 1950s, that sure as hell wasn't the least regulated time period in America's history.

[Laerod]

1) Which is wrong, what is best for an individual may or may not be good for society. That's the most retarded generalization ever made. An example of this is cod fishing in Canada. Once a productive and affluent enterprise, the lack of regulations on how many fish you can obtain at a time ruined the sea life and has thus left the cod industry in Canada non existent. Why? Because individual corporations are not always rational economic actors.

Ah, the Tragedy of the Commons.

[MERIZoC]

Empire under Obama I, the First of His Name, King of Playing the Race Card, White Genocide and Welfare Distribution.

lol wtf?

Didn't you hear about the cracker purge of '09?

[Ripoll]

1) Which is wrong, what is best for an individual may or may not be good for society. That's the most retarded generalization ever made. An example of this is cod fishing in Canada. Once a productive and affluent enterprise, the lack of regulations on how many fish you can obtain at a time ruined the sea life and has thus left the cod industry in Canada non existent. Why? Because individual corporations are not always rational economic actors.

Ah, the Tragedy of the Commons.

Precisely