NationStates

Hakons wrote:Which of these poll options have actually been implemented? Which of these poll options have worked in the long term?

Great Minarchistan wrote:

Orostan wrote:The Russo-Japanese war was no where near as devastating as WWII. It did damage the Russian economy, but not anywhere near to the same degree as WWII did to the USSR.

"Russia had lost two of its three fleets. Only its Black Sea Fleet remained, and this was the result of an earlier treaty that had prevented the fleet from leaving the Black Sea. Japan became the sixth-most powerful naval force by combined tonnage, while the Russian Navy declined to one barely stronger than that of Austria–Hungary.[96] The actual costs of the war were large enough to affect the Russian economy and, despite grain exports, the nation developed an external balance of payments deficit. The cost of military re-equipment and re-expansion after 1905 pushed the economy further into deficit, although the size of the deficit was obscured.[97]" according to the same page linked.

Nonetheless, if you analyze the GDP growth following the aftermath of the war, you can see it decreased by 19.1% (yes, I zoomed the chart at 500% and used a ruler to measure every millimeter), while USSR suffered a loss of 17.6%. No biggie huh?

When the USSR fell, it was not the USSR anymore. So we do not count it as part of the USSR's economic history.

wew

Orostan wrote:It was under Boris Yeltsin's government - a Capitalist government - that destroyed the Russian economy. This is an argument against Capitalism.

Question: If you start off your government with a failing economy (which was clearly not the inheritance of capitalism) that will end up like an anemic zombie like Japan if not fixed, will you do the harsh adjustments or end up stagnated? Yea.

Taihei Tengoku wrote:

Orostan wrote:The Russo-Japanese war was no where near as devastating as WWII. It did damage the Russian economy, but not anywhere near to the same degree as WWII did to the USSR. '

When the USSR fell, it was not the USSR anymore. So we do not count it as part of the USSR's economic history. It was under Boris Yeltsin's government - a Capitalist government - that destroyed the Russian economy. This is an argument against Capitalism.

? The Big Tank began in the 80s, a result of Brezhnevite rot dating from the late 50s and Stalin shooting the country through the heart in the 30s and 40s. The nonsense public price system was finally incorporating the black market people used to actually get their goods and lo and behold savings denoted in the nonsense price system were destroyed.

Orostan wrote:It may seem that markets preform better than socialism if a country is economically isolated under socialism, and not under a market system. The USSR took the most damage out of any nation from WW2, and took an enormous amount of damage as well from the Russian Civil War. When it was recovering to both, it was economically isolated from the West and other countries. The USSR recovered faster under socialism than it would have under capitalism. It also did not get any aid for rebuilding.

You cannot have exploitation theory and the embargo excuse at the same time. Either exchange is good or it is bad, decide.

Nioya wrote:I’m against capitalism but I’m not sure there are viable alternatives. Also not sure how to apply this to my nation.

East Gondwana wrote:"Marxism-Leninism-Obamaism"?

Obama has nothing to do with any form of communism, unless I have missed something big!

Universal Union of Panhumanity wrote:I would say the best alternative to capitalism is probably a socialist state-run economy using automated labour.

Universal Union of Panhumanity wrote:I would say the best alternative to capitalism is probably a socialist state-run economy using automated labour. This would allow for the production of more goods for lower costs, which could then be distributed evenly amongst the populace, increasing the average standard of living.

The New California Republic wrote:

Universal Union of Panhumanity wrote:I would say the best alternative to capitalism is probably a socialist state-run economy using automated labour.

And also lead to chronic unemployment most likely, in regards to the automation part.

The Empire of Pretantia wrote:Daily reminder that Capitalism won the Cold War.

Universal Union of Panhumanity wrote:I would say the best alternative to capitalism is probably a socialist state-run economy using automated labour. This would allow for the production of more goods for lower costs, which could then be distributed evenly amongst the populace, increasing the average standard of living.

I would prefer a capitalist computer-run economy using automated labor. This would allow for people to do whatever the fuck they want.

Dumb Ideologies wrote:

The Empire of Pretantia wrote:Daily reminder that Capitalism won the Cold War.


I would prefer a capitalist computer-run economy using automated labor. This would allow for people to do whatever the fuck they want.

I'd be okay with this if it had a fairly generous guaranteed minimum income (since a conventional welfare state would be too administratively expensive given the comparative shortage of jobs in a radically automated economy).

Follow-up question - would this fully automated capitalism be cosmically expansionist and/or notably homosexual?

The Grene Knyght wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:And also lead to chronic unemployment most likely, in regards to the automation part.

Under a capitalist system, for sure. Which is one of the many issues capitalism has.

I mean,it's a pretty fucked up thing that reducing manual labour is actually a bad thing lol.

The New California Republic wrote:

Universal Union of Panhumanity wrote:I would say the best alternative to capitalism is probably a socialist state-run economy using automated labour.

And also lead to chronic unemployment most likely, in regards to the automation part.

The Grene Knyght wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:And also lead to chronic unemployment most likely, in regards to the automation part.

Under a capitalist system, for sure. Which is one of the many issues capitalism has.

I mean,it's a pretty fucked up thing that reducing manual labour is actually a bad thing lol.

The Empire of Pretantia wrote:

Dumb Ideologies wrote:
I'd be okay with this if it had a fairly generous guaranteed minimum income (since a conventional welfare state would be too administratively expensive given the comparative shortage of jobs in a radically automated economy).

There is no work, my friend. The machines will take care of everything.

Follow-up question - would this fully automated capitalism be cosmically expansionist and/or notably homosexual?

It would be interdimensional and quite heteronormative.

Fully automated luxury straight interdimensional capitalism.

Dumb Ideologies wrote:

The Empire of Pretantia wrote:There is no work, my friend. The machines will take care of everything.

It would be interdimensional and quite heteronormative.

Fully automated luxury straight interdimensional capitalism.

Muh traps though :/

I am intrigued on what basis other than work or need the automated system would allocate resources. Dankness of memes?

The Empire of Pretantia wrote:Daily reminder that Capitalism won the Cold War.

Universal Union of Panhumanity wrote:I would say the best alternative to capitalism is probably a socialist state-run economy using automated labour. This would allow for the production of more goods for lower costs, which could then be distributed evenly amongst the populace, increasing the average standard of living.

I would prefer a capitalist computer-run economy using automated labor. This would allow for people to do whatever the fuck they want.

Republic of the Cristo wrote:

The Grene Knyght wrote:Under a capitalist system, for sure. Which is one of the many issues capitalism has.

I mean,it's a pretty fucked up thing that reducing manual labour is actually a bad thing lol.

...aren't you for luxury gay space communism. Aren't you for automatiin?

The Empire of Pretantia wrote:

Dumb Ideologies wrote:
Muh traps though :/

I am intrigued on what basis other than work or need the automated system would allocate resources. Dankness of memes?

Who cares, thinking is for robots. I'm just here to make dank memes.

Orostan wrote:

Great Minarchistan wrote:"Russia had lost two of its three fleets. Only its Black Sea Fleet remained, and this was the result of an earlier treaty that had prevented the fleet from leaving the Black Sea. Japan became the sixth-most powerful naval force by combined tonnage, while the Russian Navy declined to one barely stronger than that of Austria–Hungary.[96] The actual costs of the war were large enough to affect the Russian economy and, despite grain exports, the nation developed an external balance of payments deficit. The cost of military re-equipment and re-expansion after 1905 pushed the economy further into deficit, although the size of the deficit was obscured.[97]" according to the same page linked.

Nonetheless, if you analyze the GDP growth following the aftermath of the war, you can see it decreased by 19.1% (yes, I zoomed the chart at 500% and used a ruler to measure every millimeter), while USSR suffered a loss of 17.6%. No biggie huh?


wew


Question: If you start off your government with a failing economy (which was clearly not the inheritance of capitalism) that will end up like an anemic zombie like Japan if not fixed, will you do the harsh adjustments or end up stagnated? Yea.

Orostan wrote:1- I said the damage was not nearly as bad, not that there was no damage. WWII and the Russian Civil war was way worse in the long run.

And you were wrong? Tsarist Russia suffered more with the Russo-Japanese War than USSR did with the WW2.

Orostan wrote:Have you come for a debate or an argument? The Russo-Japanese war did not destroy very many farms, factories, and other bits of economic importance. It may seem to have been worse in the short term, but in the long term it was nowhere near as bad as WWII or the Russian Civil war.

It was a small economy already, so small damages do great things proportionally. The facts are out there: The GDPpc fell 19.1% following Russo-Japanese War against 17.6% following World War II. For someone who has stated that the harm for Tsarist Russia due to such war was nowhere as bad as USSR with WW2 you are blatantly wrong.

Orostan wrote:What is this? Are you trying to just dismiss the facts that you don't like?

Are you trying to just dismiss the facts that you don't like? Tsarist Russia suffered more with Russo-Japanese War than what USSR did with WW2, not "nowhere as much".

Orostan wrote:Would you prefer we say the Roman Empire has not ended yet because Italy exists?

Interesting thing, since the Roman Empire suffered the collapse while it existed, while USSR passed the harsh times to the newly-formed Russia.

Orostan wrote:4- The Soviet economy only began failing instead of stagnating after Gorby's market reforms. The USSR had its economic problems, but to blame the faliures of a market system on socialism is just incorrect.

The Grene Knyght wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:And also lead to chronic unemployment most likely, in regards to the automation part.

Under a capitalist system, for sure. Which is one of the many issues capitalism has.

The Grene Knyght wrote:

Republic of the Cristo wrote:
...aren't you for luxury gay space communism. Aren't you for automatiin?

What I mean is that, capitalism has created a paradoxical system where automation can be harmful to workers, because it's a system that requires work for the sake of work.