NationStates

Novus America wrote:

Kowani wrote:Not of you want fairness to consumers, a
proper diplomacy and a government that isn’t always strapped for cash. Plus, stratification of wealth tends to not go well.

And besides, Wilson brought the estate tax too.

Tariffs can raise plenty enough revenue.

Until everyone else raises theirs.

Novus America wrote:And do not destroy domestic industry

How’re those midwestern farmers doing?

Novus America wrote: causing soaring inequality and the loss of good paying jobs to slave labor overseas.
They allow you to prevent a suicidal race to the bottom on labor and environmental laws.

I would put that more on worker’s rights legislation, but sure.

Novus America wrote:Global trade causes stratification of wealth.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.usnews ... ontext=amp

Are you really surprised? How do you think destroying high paying jobs here to create low paying ones elsewhere would not stratification of wealth?

I don’t know, let’s ask Andrew Carnegie.

Kowani wrote:

Conserative Morality wrote:Anyone could have made an income tax or dropped tariffs. Only Wilson could have fucked up international relations for generations to come.

Is this one of those “Should’ve stayed out of WW1 things?”

I think it's more that Wilson's policies set up a bunch of states that couldn't really sustain themselves nor really knew how to democracy which allowed the rise and success of radicals like Communists and Fascists.

Honestly, destroying the Habsburg empire was the best thing they could have done for Fascists. Both Karl and his son Otto were committed against Fascism and Communism (in fact, Otto refused to join the Nazi party when offered by Wilhelm [the former Kaiser Wilhelm's son], and Otto latter collaborated with Churchill on creating a plan where he would have been instrumental in creating a resistance against the Nazis in Hungary and Austria, but that never came about).

Salus Maior wrote:

Kowani wrote:Is this one of those “Should’ve stayed out of WW1 things?”

I think it's more that Wilson's policies set up a bunch of states that couldn't really sustain themselves nor really knew how to democracy which allowed the rise and success of radicals like Communists and Fascists.

While I’m not about to deny that, part of the blame there lies on the French, and the rise of those ideologies, at least in part is the Great Depression, which seems a bit silly to blame Wilson for.
Plus, Poland was doomed no matter what.

Kowani wrote:

Salus Maior wrote:
I think it's more that Wilson's policies set up a bunch of states that couldn't really sustain themselves nor really knew how to democracy which allowed the rise and success of radicals like Communists and Fascists.

While I’m not about to deny that, part of the blame there lies on the French, and the rise of those ideologies, at least in part is the Great Depression, which seems a bit silly to blame Wilson for.
Plus, Poland was doomed no matter what.

The economic depression would not have been as bad as it was for the Danubian states if they were still within the Austrian Empire.

Salus Maior wrote:

Kowani wrote:While I’m not about to deny that, part of the blame there lies on the French, and the rise of those ideologies, at least in part is the Great Depression, which seems a bit silly to blame Wilson for.
Plus, Poland was doomed no matter what.

The economic depression would not have been as bad as it was for the Danubian states if they were still within the Austrian Empire.

You know. If they weren’t a powder keg waiting to go off.

Kowani wrote:

Novus America wrote:
Tariffs can raise plenty enough revenue.

Until everyone else raises theirs.

Novus America wrote:And do not destroy domestic industry

How’re those midwestern farmers doing?

Novus America wrote: causing soaring inequality and the loss of good paying jobs to slave labor overseas.
They allow you to prevent a suicidal race to the bottom on labor and environmental laws.

I would put that more on worker’s rights legislation, but sure.

Novus America wrote:Global trade causes stratification of wealth.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.usnews ... ontext=amp

Are you really surprised? How do you think destroying high paying jobs here to create low paying ones elsewhere would not stratification of wealth?

I don’t know, let’s ask Andrew Carnegie.

Well tariffs alone should not be the only revenue source.

And sure there will be some harmed in the restructuring away from our suicidal reliance on China.
Just as China destroyed millions of jobs, a fraction of that might be lost in return.

Ask the millions of Americans who lost their jobs to China.

Anyways you cannot have labor protection laws AND unrestricted trade!
You can only pick one.
Because labor laws cannot protect foreign workers!
The more you protect your workers, the more jobs move to places with fewer protections!
Tariffs are REQUIRED to enforce labor laws.

And you simply failed to address that global trade causes inequality.

See if a Carnegie cannot outsource and offshore you can keep him in check with taxes and labor laws. But in a globalized world he can easily evade those labor laws and taxes!

Funny you of all people now think supply side trickle down economics are good.

Kowani wrote:

Salus Maior wrote:
The economic depression would not have been as bad as it was for the Danubian states if they were still within the Austrian Empire.

You know. If they weren’t a powder keg waiting to go off.

Prior to WWI most of the ethnic subjects of the Austrian Empire were loyal to the Emperor and were noted to be very patriotic (not only by Austrian sources but by sources in other countries such as Britain). Now, once the war started and military disasters piled up on themselves I don't think there was much going back to that (the same can also be said in Russia and other powers participating in the War as well, mind), but if it weren't for the fact that the Entente was intent on destroying the Habsburg dominion (even to the point where they were rejecting or ignoring incredibly generous and open handed peace agreements being handed to them by Kaiser Karl that would have likely ended the bulk of the war early), I think it's possible it would have survived to some extent and for the better.

Kowani wrote:

Conserative Morality wrote:Anyone could have made an income tax or dropped tariffs. Only Wilson could have fucked up international relations for generations to come.

Is this one of those “Should’ve stayed out of WW1 things?”

Nah, it's one of those "Wilson fucked the peace afterwards" things

Kowani wrote:

Conserative Morality wrote:Anyone could have made an income tax or dropped tariffs. Only Wilson could have fucked up international relations for generations to come.

Is this one of those “Should’ve stayed out of WW1 things?”

For the record though, it should have IMO.

The Xenopolis Confederation wrote:

Kowani wrote:Is this one of those “Should’ve stayed out of WW1 things?”

For the record though, it should have IMO.

At least under President Wilson anyway.

Kowani wrote:

Conserative Morality wrote:Anyone could have made an income tax or dropped tariffs. Only Wilson could have fucked up international relations for generations to come.

Is this one of those “Should’ve stayed out of WW1 things?”

Apart from the whole "The US chose the wrong side" thing, it's less about "joining" the Great War and more about the fact that Wilson almost single-handedly fucked up the world's diplomatic order by his insistence on the retarded 14 points.

North German Realm wrote:

Kowani wrote:Is this one of those “Should’ve stayed out of WW1 things?”

Apart from the whole "The US chose the wrong side" thing, it's less about "joining" the Great War and more about the fact that Wilson almost single-handedly fucked up the world's diplomatic order by his insistence on the retarded 14 points.

The 14 points he half-assed so he could get his precious League Of Nations.

Conserative Morality wrote:

North German Realm wrote:Apart from the whole "The US chose the wrong side" thing, it's less about "joining" the Great War and more about the fact that Wilson almost single-handedly fucked up the world's diplomatic order by his insistence on the retarded 14 points.

The 14 points he half-assed so he could get his precious League Of Nations.

Which America didn't even join.

Hanafuridake wrote:

Conserative Morality wrote:The 14 points he half-assed so he could get his precious League Of Nations.

Which America didn't even join.

This train of posts is hilarious.

Asherahan wrote:

Hanafuridake wrote:
Which America didn't even join.

This train of posts is hilarious.

To add context the political rival of Wilson was annoyed by Wilsons internationalism and was willing to compromise. He even wanted the 14 points in full, and the international body to have the U.S as a member. Thing is that it was a massive troll because Wilson hated the guy. The guy gave Wilson a stroke, and his wife essentially ran the U.S for six months (it caused a legal cluster storm).

Hanafuridake wrote:

Conserative Morality wrote:The 14 points he half-assed so he could get his precious League Of Nations.

Which America didn't even join.

When you seriously think about it, it makes total sense. The 14 points, and more importantly the League of Nations absolutely and utterly fucked any hopes of future peace and understanding there could possibly be in Europe, Asia, and Africa, while safely securing the American Continent's future. It would be the logical conclusion of the Monroe Doctrine, or at least the general interpretation of it by most US presidents before Wilson, to fuck the Old World so hard and so irrecoverably that South America would become their own playground without any possibility of European intervention.

Kowani wrote:

Conserative Morality wrote:Anyone could have made an income tax or dropped tariffs. Only Wilson could have fucked up international relations for generations to come.

Is this one of those “Should’ve stayed out of WW1 things?”

Not only that, once the dumbasses in DC decided we had to get involved, we didn't have to make promises we knew we couldn't keep, force through solutions based on ideological lines, and screw up the Russia intervention- all at once.

Diopolis wrote:

Kowani wrote:Is this one of those “Should’ve stayed out of WW1 things?”

Not only that, once the dumbasses in DC decided we had to get involved, we didn't have to make promises we knew we couldn't keep, force through solutions based on ideological lines, and screw up the Russia intervention- all at once.

Murphy's law in action.

Asherahan wrote:

Diopolis wrote:Not only that, once the dumbasses in DC decided we had to get involved, we didn't have to make promises we knew we couldn't keep, force through solutions based on ideological lines, and screw up the Russia intervention- all at once.

Murphy's law in action.

Oh, and then, for ideological reasons, we had to delay the peace with Germany until they were inevitably going to have a minor civil war over it.

Diopolis wrote:

Asherahan wrote:Murphy's law in action.

Oh, and then, for ideological reasons, we had to delay the peace with Germany until they were inevitably going to have a minor civil war over it.

That is dickery not Murphy's law.

Asherahan wrote:

Diopolis wrote:Not only that, once the dumbasses in DC decided we had to get involved, we didn't have to make promises we knew we couldn't keep, force through solutions based on ideological lines, and screw up the Russia intervention- all at once.

Murphy's law in action.

Honestly, I doubt anyone was expecting the aftermath of the Great War to be even remotely worse than the hell that was the war itself, and yet here we are.

North German Realm wrote:

Asherahan wrote:Murphy's law in action.

Honestly, I doubt anyone was expecting the aftermath of the Great War to be even remotely worse than the hell that was the war itself, and yet here we are.

Don't forget the Spanish Flu.

Conserative Morality wrote:

Salus Maior wrote:
I too think that Wilsonian indulgence of nationalism on ethnic lines was incredibly short sighted and naive.

Wilson worst president

I actually agree with this.

North German Realm wrote:

Asherahan wrote:Murphy's law in action.

Honestly, I doubt anyone was expecting the aftermath of the Great War to be even remotely worse than the hell that was the war itself, and yet here we are.

Truly, WWI was a disaster for the West, if not the entire world.