Post Archive

Region: Libertatem

History

Pevvania wrote:http://fee.org/anythingpeaceful/detail/dont-put-eleanor-roosevelt-on-the-10-bill

Don't put Eleanor Roosevelt on the $10 bill. She was just another naive, economically illiterate laywoman who happened to be married to the president. Harriet Tubman, Ayn Rand or even Rose Friedman would be better choices.

But also

Why put anyone different on the 10?

Symbolism? It's money. Who cares?

Hallo Island wrote:Yeah, she doesn't deserve to be on toilet paper.

Right. The privilege to have a spot on the national toilet paper is reserved for Paul Krugman.

Pevvania

Miencraft wrote:But also

Why put anyone different on the 10?

Symbolism? It's money. Who cares?

We should definitely get Jackson off the twenty. He was an awful president.

hmm yes let's put ayn rand of our fiat currency

Night-Watchman State wrote:Hello, people of Libertatem. I was told by one of your citizens Cosmo Kramer/Pevvania that this region is the most prominent member of REATO, a militant anti-communist organization that actively engages in a war on tyranny and spreads democracy and liberty throughout NationStates. I initially planned on creating my own inter-regional anti-commie fighting force, but decided to give up the idea after finding out that such fighting force with similar objectives already exists as a a well-established, powerful organization. Hence, I'm here to ask whether I can sign up to join your army so we can together take the fight to commies of all sorts, in other words essentially annihilate everything that is red. I will be sending a nation here shortly to make communication easier.

-NWS

Most definitely, see you soon.

Reaganomic Nws

Hallo Island wrote:We should definitely get Jackson off the twenty. He was an awful president.

That, I can back.

Kings Island

liberty dollars pls

Figures: ayn rand, murray rothbard, robert nozick, fred phelps...

Miencraft, Reaganomic Nws

Republic Of Minerva wrote:liberty dollars pls

Figures: ayn rand, murray rothbard, robert nozick, fred phelps...

...Fred Phelps?

tfw gold only has value because of the value humans ascribe to it and no one actually cares about it's use in circuit boards

tfw diamonds are only expensive due to artificial scarcity

Alyakia wrote:tfw gold only has value because of the value humans ascribe to it and no one actually cares about it's use in circuit boards

tfw diamonds are only expensive due to artificial scarcity

Look guys, Aly passed Economics 101!

Hallo Island wrote:...Fred Phelps?

Why not?

Pevvania

Hey, this is a puppet nation of Night-Watchman State (hence, my name "NWS") As of now, this will be my main nation, which I will station here in Libertatem.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:Look guys, Aly passed Economics 101!

i set a gold standard for posting

Pevvania wrote:http://fee.org/anythingpeaceful/detail/dont-put-eleanor-roosevelt-on-the-10-bill

Don't put Eleanor Roosevelt on the $10 bill. She was just another naive, economically illiterate laywoman who happened to be married to the president. Harriet Tubman, Ayn Rand or even Rose Friedman would be better choices.

Whatttttt? Eleanor was the f***ing bomb. She made huge strides for civil rights.

Miencraft wrote:But also

Why put anyone different on the 10?

Symbolism? It's money. Who cares?

Um we don't have a single woman on our currency and that's not a great thing.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:liberty dollars pls

Figures: ayn rand, murray rothbard, robert nozick, fred phelps...

Are we talking Fred Phelps of the WBC? Because he was a hateful lunatic.

I say we put a woman in the 20 instead. Alexander Hamilton was a great man and the first secretary treasury. Andrew Jackson was a slave trading genocidal brute, and ironically, an opponent of paper currency.

Hallo Island

Kings Island wrote:I say we put a woman in the 20 instead. Alexander Hamilton was a great man and the first secretary treasury. Andrew Jackson was a slave trading genocidal brute, and ironically, an opponent of paper currency.

Yeah, I totally agree

Kings Island wrote:I say we put a woman in the 20 instead. Alexander Hamilton was a great man and the first secretary treasury. Andrew Jackson was a slave trading genocidal brute, and ironically, an opponent of paper currency.

I wouldn't say Hamilton was great, per say, he only wanted rich people to be able to vote. Basically like Donald Trump.

Kings Island wrote:I say we put a woman in the 20 instead. Alexander Hamilton was a great man and the first secretary treasury. Andrew Jackson was a slave trading genocidal brute, and ironically, an opponent of paper currency.

I despise everything about Alexander Hamilton. He was a statist and he was the largest proponent for a nationalized bank that the nation has ever seen. He spat on the idea of even having states. He once advocated for a 65% tax rate of all people. This is in a time when people were making dirt anyway.

So you disagree with Jackson on one thing, that is obviously reason enough. You cannot judge any historical figure based on one issue.

Pevvania

Humpheria In Libertatem wrote:I despise everything about Alexander Hamilton. He was a statist and he was the largest proponent for a nationalized bank that the nation has ever seen. He spat on the idea of even having states. He once advocated for a 65% tax rate of all people. This is in a time when people were making dirt anyway.

So you disagree with Jackson on one thing, that is obviously reason enough. You cannot judge any historical figure based on one issue.

As well as slaughtering the Cherokees and other tribes, he also intentionally destroyed the economy.

Jackson, not Hamilton ^

Hallo Island wrote:As well as slaughtering the Cherokees and other tribes, he also intentionally destroyed the economy.

Kings Island wrote:I say we put a woman in the 20 instead. Alexander Hamilton was a great man and the first secretary treasury. Andrew Jackson was a slave trading genocidal brute, and ironically, an opponent of paper currency.

He already said that.

But not this

Hallo Island wrote:As well as slaughtering the Cherokees and other tribes, he also intentionally destroyed the economy.

Midland County wrote:Um we don't have a single woman on our currency and that's not a great thing

This is an important issue because...?

Look, putting a woman on currency for the sake of diversity makes the entire symbolism of what you're trying to do moot, on top of the fact that nobody really cares all that much about the symbolism of the things on money.

The New United States

Humpheria In Libertatem wrote:How so?

Jesus, history books people, go buy them.

Hallo Island wrote:Jesus, history books people, go buy them.

So, you can't explain it? Ok.

I've proven multiple time that I know a thing or two about history.

The American Empire In Libertatem

Humpheria In Libertatem wrote:So, you can't explain it? Ok.

I've proven multiple time that I know a thing or two about history.

Panic of 1837, I believe is what it is called. Google it.

Hallo Island wrote:Panic of 1837, I believe is what it is called. Google it.

Oh, child.

The only mistake Jackson made to contribute to the Panic was not disperse the money far enough. The fault for the economic issue (that didn't even lead to disaster) lay in the bank owners that did not wisely handle the money. If anything, Van Buren could have done more to clean up the bank owners' mess.

But let's not talk about how Hamilton was essentially the founder of America's debt. When he worked with the Framers, he advocated for the President being given a life term, absolute veto powers, and complete control of the taxation system. The system which he later campaigned to be administrated heavy handedly with an iron tax rate of 65%.

Miencraft, Pevvania, The American Empire In Libertatem, Saint Jonas, Landosenrego

Yeah, no. I ended up on the prosecution for a mock trial against Jackson for school. I sifted through mounds of primary source documents for two weeks. You should probably just take my word on that subject. Oh, yeah, and we're just ignoring the aforementioned mass genocide. So, no, he wasn't a good guy.

Hallo Island wrote:Yeah, no. I ended up on the prosecution for a mock trial against Jackson for school. I sifted through mounds of primary source documents for two weeks. You should probably just take my word on that subject. Oh, yeah, and we're just ignoring the aforementioned mass genocide. So, no, he wasn't a good guy.

Yes, I'll just take your word on it, then. Not like I could know anything about it.

That is why I think it would be fundamentally impossible to debate history with you. You're still wanting to judge historical figures rather than assess them. On morality, no less. I dislike what Hamilton did and advocated for, I approve of Jackson's economic decentralization policies and general support of decentralization. We cannot be in the business of judging anyone.

The American Empire In Libertatem

Regardless, it's late and I have meetings in the morning. Goodnight, guys.

Hallo Island wrote:Panic of 1837, I believe is what it is called. Google it.

I would argue that Jackson's entire presidency could be considered a panic

Hallo Island

Miencraft wrote:nobody really cares all that much about the symbolism of the things on money.

try taking washington off the money lol

Humpheria In Libertatem wrote:Oh, child.

The only mistake Jackson made to contribute to the Panic was not disperse the money far enough. The fault for the economic issue (that didn't even lead to disaster) lay in the bank owners that did not wisely handle the money. If anything, Van Buren could have done more to clean up the bank owners' mess.

But let's not talk about how Hamilton was essentially the founder of America's debt. When he worked with the Framers, he advocated for the President being given a life term, absolute veto powers, and complete control of the taxation system. The system which he later campaigned to be administrated heavy handedly with an iron tax rate of 65%.

Well the idea of having a president with a life term and unlimited veto power wasn't very radical at the time. The position of president was essentially designed to possess most of the powers congress erroneously believed the king still possessed.

IE the power to command the military, veto legislation (though this was only partly implemented), and to act as a head of state as well as a head of government.

There are also certain advantages to an elected monarch. If the head of government doesn't have to worry about reelection, he is free to enact greater change.

I am opposed to such a system due to the lack of accountability but I wouldn't say that it's supporters (especially at such a time) were the enemies of liberty.

Indeed, the founders were (rightly) afraid of the tyranny of the masses. Certainly the argument can be made that an elected, constitutional monarch is a great way of ensuring the people's rights are protected from the legislatures.

Humpheria In Libertatem wrote:Oh, child.

The only mistake Jackson made to contribute to the Panic was not disperse the money far enough. The fault for the economic issue (that didn't even lead to disaster) lay in the bank owners that did not wisely handle the money. If anything, Van Buren could have done more to clean up the bank owners' mess.

But let's not talk about how Hamilton was essentially the founder of America's debt. When he worked with the Framers, he advocated for the President being given a life term, absolute veto powers, and complete control of the taxation system. The system which he later campaigned to be administrated heavy handedly with an iron tax rate of 65%.

Oh, and I believe the first US loan was actually authorized by John Adams when he was the ambassador to Holland.

Post self-deleted by Hallo Island.

Hey, so can we just talk about how Minerva slid this gem right under our noses four days ago?

The Macro-Micronation of Republic of Minerva

4 days ago

Most people who are under the minimum wage get a raise within the next six months.

Plus, if Thoreau could reduce his expenses to less than $10,000 a year, I don't see why it's not possible for anyone else too.

Also, many people do take 2 jobs.

I hope that was a joke, Min. If it is not, see below.

Because it's a little more difficult to live off of that in 2015 than it was in 1845.

Also not everyone is down with living in a crappy shack on Walden Pond.

And before someone says that the house on Walden Pond was not a crappy shack, I would argue that by today's standards pretty much any house from 1845 is a crappy shack.

Well it is nice that someone else here stays up super late.

So after hundreds of seizures and re-founds of communist territory, not to mention dozens of invasions, tag raids and infiltrations, the communists have been able to make their first ever territorial gain against us, in the form of a dead, founderless region that happened to once be a REATO member, Yerfilag. Meh.

If the economic illiterates manage to gain any real victories, I'll be in the bath tub.

Miencraft

[nation=short]Humpheria[/nation] has got it right. Alexander Hamilton never belonged on the money in the first place. He created perhaps the most destructive legal concept in United States history, "implied powers", which basically meant that the Constitution gave several powers to the government not recorded in the Enumerated Powers. For example, this thinking says that the 'Tax and Spend Clause' justifies the existence of Social Security, despite not one part of the Constitution giving authority to create a national pension program. He used this ridiculous idea to create the National Bank, despite the Constitutional Convention explicitly rejected granting central banking power to the federal government. Hamilton had nothing but contempt for the federal system, seeking to marginalise the states at any opportunity. He helped introduce the Whiskey Tax and was a big fan of protectionism. Hamilton was no hero.

Jackson's mistake in the 1830s was just dissolving the National Bank. The Panic of 1837 could have been avoided if he'd dissolved every state bank and creating truly free market banking. The state banks were the ones that were over-inflating the money supply which created the credit bubble that triggered the crash in the first place.

Miencraft

Pevvania wrote:So after hundreds of seizures and re-founds of communist territory, not to mention dozens of invasions, tag raids and infiltrations, the communists have been able to make their first ever territorial gain against us, in the form of a dead, founderless region that happened to once be a REATO member, Yerfilag. Meh.

If the economic illiterates manage to gain any real victories, I'll be in the bath tub.

Funny how you always tell the same after every new defeat. Funny also how you told us you had captured a very important left region, but never talked about it again. Oh, and funny how you tried to intimidate smaller left-wing regions, which are perfectly safe, and never harmed any of them.

Pevvania wrote:

The Panic of 1837 could have been avoided if he'd dissolved every state bank and creating truly free market banking.

Did he have the Constitutional power to do this though?

Post self-deleted by Pevvania.

Hey Pev, why are you deleting you comments? Don't you know what to answer?

Pev, I am sorry to say this, but...you're a bad military manager! What kind of a feeling is it to be constantly humiliated?

Rothbard Communities wrote:Funny how you always tell the same after every new defeat. Funny also how you told us you had captured a very important left region, but never talked about it again. Oh, and funny how you tried to intimidate smaller left-wing regions, which are perfectly safe, and never harmed any of them.

Talk to me when you understand economics, kid.

According to the World Bank, "[B]This research provides solid evidence that privatization “generally” works, both for the firms that are privatized and for privatizing economies as a whole.[/B] While privatization usually results both in increased productivity and reduced employment in privatized firms, fears of negative overall effects at the economy level are not justified. An important caveat here is that the benefits of privatizations depend on market institutions being in place. The countries that manage to ensure property rights protection and the rule-oflaw, impose hard budget constraints, increase competition, and improve corporate governance reap the largest benefits. If appropriate institutions are not in place, privatization often fails to improve performance at the firm level and for the economy as a whole. Empirical research provides a strong case for openness in privatization. Virtually all studies point to a positive role of foreign investors. Firms privatized to foreign owners exhibit the highest productivity increases. Moreover, as foreign owners usually buy the assets in a more competitive bidding process, they are likely to pay a high price for the privatized assets—and the threat of competition from foreign bidders also tends to raise the bids of domestic investors. Receiving a high net privatization price is important, not only for fiscal reasons, but also for the political legitimacy of emerging private property rights and the sustainability of reforms.

Once translated into policymakers’ language, the lessons from privatization research are quite straightforward, as summarized below.

- Privatization can deliver substantial benefits. In some cases productivity doubles; in other cases it increases by single percentage points. The “weighted average” productivity increase is probably around 20 percent.

- Privatization is usually accompanied by either no change or a reduction in employment. Privatizers should be prepared to handle the increased unemployment, and experience suggests that most privatizing countries manage this problem reasonably well.

- Privatization usually produces welfare gains beyond the increased productivity at the firm level.

- Restructuring enterprises prior to privatization is unlikely to work.

- Mass privatization is usually inferior to the case by case approach. Non-cash privatization is generally worse than trade sales and share issue privatization. The choice between share issue privatizations and trade sales is driven by several factors-firm size, the need to develop national stock markets, and the trade-off between better governance under concentrated ownership versus the difficulty of finding a single buyer for a large company.

- Policy trade-offs are resolved most effectively when privatization is transparent and open to foreign investors. However, insiders and domestic investors always lobby against allowing foreign participation and often stir up nationalistic sentiment. Precluding foreign ownership always results in lower privatization prices and lower post-privatization efficiency.

- Share issue privatization brings an important side benefit of contributing to the development of the national stock market.

- Privatization works well wherever there are good institutions. China and Russia are not outliers. China’s growth has come from private sector development, even as many SOEs are still destroying value. Russia lacked good institutions yet the demand for institutions has started to emerge. While this may be happening more slowly than expected–due to macroeconomic instability, or inequality and illegitimacy of property rights–it is not clear whether there was a better alternative, since openness to foreigners was probably politically unacceptable.

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTDECABC2006/Resources/gurievmeggison.PDF

Rothbard Communities wrote:Pev, I am sorry to say this, but...you're a bad military manager! What kind of a feeling is it to be constantly humiliated?

Why is this guy still here?

Rothbard Communities wrote:Pev, I am sorry to say this, but...you're a bad military manager! What kind of a feeling is it to be constantly humiliated?

What are you talking about? You're a 14-year-old fascist who's decided to start doing tag raids and refounds of regions we've never heard of. WTF is Funland? A region you made up just to create another pretend 'victory' for you and your circle-jerk to parade about? If it wasn't for me, the war as we know it would not exist. As much as your ilk likes to trash-talk about our military capabilities, I know that you all fear us, and it's not difficult to see why. While you can only tag raid a region, we've been very good at exploiting your incompetence. Region after region has fallen under our flag. TGNK, GRENADA, The Communist Region and its offspring, The Cooperative Union, The Republics of Cuba, International Socialists, CAPS. Important regions that actually meant something to their inhabitants and their allies. What do the reds, what do you, have to show for their fascistic crusade? Almost nothing. Partially this is because libertarian founders are often older and therefore smarter, so they manage to look after their regions better. Partially it's because of the tendency of communists to abandon their friends when it's convenient. Mostly, though, it's because they never see us coming. And what have you done in all of this? Pieces together a terrorist group out of a few empty regions. Bravo. But it'll take a lot more than that to put a chink in our armour.

Miencraft, The New United States, Right-Winged Nation, Muh Roads, Hallo Island, Condealism

So I saw a discussion on andrew jackson. I've got trail of tears and creating problems for future presidents

Pevvania wrote:So after hundreds of seizures and re-founds of communist territory, not to mention dozens of invasions, tag raids and infiltrations, the communists have been able to make their first ever territorial gain against us, in the form of a dead, founderless region that happened to once be a REATO member, Yerfilag. Meh.

If the economic illiterates manage to gain any real victories, I'll be in the bath tub.

Easy for you to say - they were only acquaintances to you.

Still, you're right. I wouldn't call the destruction of Yerfilag a Fleet victory: If South Otselic destroyed the region of his own free will, then the region was dead and never going to come back before the reds refounded it... but if he were somehow coerced (or worse, hacked), that could be considered a war crime (or even a violation of site rules), also rendering their "triumph" null. What really bothers me about this isn't so much that the Fleet actually managed to finally get their hands on a region we've actually heard of (because, honestly, something like that was bound to happen sooner or later) - it's that a piece of NationStates history, a rich fictional world built by RPers, a player in interregional politics for years suddenly vanished without a trace, and we have no idea why.

@Hallo are you a believer of free will? If so look up Jean Paul Sartre.

I honestly, as the current main diplomat and the guy who controls all the sentinels, have never heard of "funland."

I turned down their embassy request because it was only a one-man region and it didn't look very secure. When the founder complained, I let him establish embassies with my puppet regions.

Predictably, nothing came of it.

So who would you guys vote for in the 2016 U.S. presidential election from the current candidates?

Pevvania wrote:Talk to me when you understand economics, kid.

According to the World Bank, "[B]This research provides solid evidence that privatization “generally” works, both for the firms that are privatized and for privatizing economies as a whole.[/B] While privatization usually results both in increased productivity and reduced employment in privatized firms, fears of negative overall effects at the economy level are not justified. An important caveat here is that the benefits of privatizations depend on market institutions being in place. The countries that manage to ensure property rights protection and the rule-oflaw, impose hard budget constraints, increase competition, and improve corporate governance reap the largest benefits. If appropriate institutions are not in place, privatization often fails to improve performance at the firm level and for the economy as a whole. Empirical research provides a strong case for openness in privatization. Virtually all studies point to a positive role of foreign investors. Firms privatized to foreign owners exhibit the highest productivity increases. Moreover, as foreign owners usually buy the assets in a more competitive bidding process, they are likely to pay a high price for the privatized assets—and the threat of competition from foreign bidders also tends to raise the bids of domestic investors. Receiving a high net privatization price is important, not only for fiscal reasons, but also for the political legitimacy of emerging private property rights and the sustainability of reforms.

Once translated into policymakers’ language, the lessons from privatization research are quite straightforward, as summarized below.

- Privatization can deliver substantial benefits. In some cases productivity doubles; in other cases it increases by single percentage points. The “weighted average” productivity increase is probably around 20 percent.

- Privatization is usually accompanied by either no change or a reduction in employment. Privatizers should be prepared to handle the increased unemployment, and experience suggests that most privatizing countries manage this problem reasonably well.

- Privatization usually produces welfare gains beyond the increased productivity at the firm level.

- Restructuring enterprises prior to privatization is unlikely to work.

- Mass privatization is usually inferior to the case by case approach. Non-cash privatization is generally worse than trade sales and share issue privatization. The choice between share issue privatizations and trade sales is driven by several factors-firm size, the need to develop national stock markets, and the trade-off between better governance under concentrated ownership versus the difficulty of finding a single buyer for a large company.

- Policy trade-offs are resolved most effectively when privatization is transparent and open to foreign investors. However, insiders and domestic investors always lobby against allowing foreign participation and often stir up nationalistic sentiment. Precluding foreign ownership always results in lower privatization prices and lower post-privatization efficiency.

- Share issue privatization brings an important side benefit of contributing to the development of the national stock market.

- Privatization works well wherever there are good institutions. China and Russia are not outliers. China’s growth has come from private sector development, even as many SOEs are still destroying value. Russia lacked good institutions yet the demand for institutions has started to emerge. While this may be happening more slowly than expected–due to macroeconomic instability, or inequality and illegitimacy of property rights–it is not clear whether there was a better alternative, since openness to foreigners was probably politically unacceptable.

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTDECABC2006/Resources/gurievmeggison.PDF

Wow, you copy-pasted some text from some neoliberal economists. I am not going to discuss about that absolutely stupid text you posted here...all I can tell you is: You should maybe read some works of Joseph E. Stiglitz (nobel prize winner), Paul Krugman (another nobel prize winner), or Thomas Piketty (probably one of the next nobel prize winners). These are currently the most important economists worldwide, and what they say isn't exactly what you say. Oh, and by the way: I am 29, journalist, and have studied political science and...economics.

Pevvania wrote:What are you talking about? You're a 14-year-old fascist who's decided to start doing tag raids and refounds of regions we've never heard of. WTF is Funland? A region you made up just to create another pretend 'victory' for you and your circle-jerk to parade about? If it wasn't for me, the war as we know it would not exist. As much as your ilk likes to trash-talk about our military capabilities, I know that you all fear us, and it's not difficult to see why. While you can only tag raid a region, we've been very good at exploiting your incompetence. Region after region has fallen under our flag. TGNK, GRENADA, The Communist Region and its offspring, The Cooperative Union, The Republics of Cuba, International Socialists, CAPS. Important regions that actually meant something to their inhabitants and their allies. What do the reds, what do you, have to show for their fascistic crusade? Almost nothing. Partially this is because libertarian founders are often older and therefore smarter, so they manage to look after their regions better. Partially it's because of the tendency of communists to abandon their friends when it's convenient. Mostly, though, it's because they never see us coming. And what have you done in all of this? Pieces together a terrorist group out of a few empty regions. Bravo. But it'll take a lot more than that to put a chink in our armour.

I and my entourage didn't have anything to do with the regions you listed. When CAPS was captured, I only started playing NS. Since then, nothing came from you. Funland wasn't made up by us, it had embassies with one of your military regions, Fort Colidge. Oh, and nobody fears you. If someone would have to fear you, you wouldn't send silly messages to Comintern member. I repeat myself: you are a really bad military director. Some time ago, Libertatem was a feared and respected region, but your glorious times are over. Everybody is laughing at you, and especially at you, Pev. You have been losing some of your biggest allies these last months, you didn't manage to organise any attack and...we are still waiting for the retaliation you announced. Pev, you are done. To all the other members of this region, I would recommend to change your military leader.

Rothbard Communities wrote:Wow, you copy-pasted some text from some neoliberal economists. I am not going to discuss about that absolutely stupid text you posted here...all I can tell you is: You should maybe read some works of Joseph E. Stiglitz (nobel prize winner), Paul Krugman (another nobel prize winner), or Thomas Piketty (probably one of the next nobel prize winners). These are currently the most important economists worldwide, and what they say isn't exactly what you say. Oh, and by the way: I am 29, journalist, and have studied political science and...economics.

There's no such thing as a communist with degrees in political science and economics. Grow up.

Rothbard Communities wrote:Everybody is laughing at you, and especially at you, Pev. You have been losing some of your biggest allies these last months, you didn't manage to organise any attack and...we are still waiting for the retaliation you announced. Pev, you are done. To all the other members of this region, I would recommend to change your military leader.

Yes, darn you, Pev! What will we ever do without Yerfilag or Funland?! You've ruined us!

Kings Island, Hallo Island, Humpheria In Libertatem

I'm pretty sure even Krugman wants to keep the means of production in private hands.

Hallo Island wrote:There's no such thing as a communist with degrees in political science and economics. Grow up.

Mhhhh...yes there is. I can give you hundreds of examples.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:I'm pretty sure even Krugman wants to keep the means of production in private hands.

Probably, yes. But he surely is anything but a libertarian. The problem is, you think communists are all old-fashioned Stalinists. But that's not true. USSR state capitalism/"socialism" hasn't worked. Neither has capitalism. The ongoing financial and economic crisis is the best proof.

So, is the RMB's current tone going to be a trend, or...?

Rothbard Communities wrote:Mhhhh...yes there is. I can give you hundreds of examples.

Definitely none on here. Have you met even met the people you associate with?

Hallo Island wrote:Definitely none on here. Have you met even met the people you associate with?

I don't understand the question.

Rothbard Communities wrote:Probably, yes. But he surely is anything but a libertarian. The problem is, you think communists are all old-fashioned Stalinists. But that's not true. USSR state capitalism/"socialism" hasn't worked. Neither has capitalism. The ongoing financial and economic crisis is the best proof.

He certainly is more liberal than you by a long shot, as he won an award for an essay on free trade.

The ongoing financial and economic crisis is proof that central planning doesn't work. It has nothing to do with the free market "capitalism."

Kings Island, Pevvania

Republic Of Minerva wrote:He certainly is more liberal than you by a long shot, as he won an award for an essay on free trade.

The ongoing financial and economic crisis is proof that central planning doesn't work. It has nothing to do with the free market "capitalism."

Wow. You haven't understood anything about economics. And btw, writing an essay about free trade does not mean defending free trade.

Is that the libertarian approach to free speech?

Rothbard Communities wrote:Wow. You haven't understood anything about economics. And btw, writing an essay about free trade does not mean defending free trade.

Wow. Guess what, you have yet to refute anything Pev, I, or any other person here has said, resorting to fallacies and ad hominems.

Wow. Guess what, if you researched about it, you would realize that he was defending free trade.

Wow.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:Wow. Guess what, you have yet to refute anything Pev, I, or any other person here has said, resorting to fallacies and ad hominems.

Wow. Guess what, if you researched about it, you would realize that he was defending free trade.

Wow.

Link?

I can't find the exact PDF, but:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB122394373157731081

Rothbard Communities wrote:Is that the libertarian approach to free speech?

There is no such thing as an "approach to free speech". Either it's free, or it isn't.

Kings Island wrote:There is no such thing as an "approach to free speech". Either it's free, or it isn't.

So, if I was ejected, does that mean speech isn't free in this region?

Rothbard Communities wrote:So, if I was ejected, does that mean speech isn't free in this region?

It would, had you not insulted several people during your time here.

Rothbard Communities wrote:So, if I was ejected, does that mean speech isn't free in this region?

It means you come here to do nothing but insult everyone else. If you want to have an intelligent debate, that's fine.

I wasn't the one who ejected you, but if you want to stay here you're going to need to try harder to prove you should than just "'Tatem allows free speech".

Reaganomic Nws

Post self-deleted by Reaganomic Nws.

Possibly relevant: https://xkcd.com/1357/

Miencraft, Reaganomic Nws

Condealism wrote:Possibly relevant: https://xkcd.com/1357/

Very

Rothbard Communities wrote:Pev, I am sorry to say this, but...you're a bad military manager! What kind of a feeling is it to be constantly humiliated?

> Military Manager of Libertatem is terrible and incompetent, despite having leadership roles in attacks on regions of actual significance to the left

> The Spooky Scary Skeleton Monster of Leftist Unity defeats Libertarian powerhouses such as the notorious Funland, displaying their impressive military prowess and sharp maneuvering skills

Stay classy, statist.

Miencraft, Pevvania, Landosenrego

Who wants to enlighten me with the military ethics of Libertatem? I just read the remarkably coherent Second REAGAN Treaty, and the concepts of mutual defense and communist liberation are morally basic stances. I still would like to challenge them, though: wasn't the allure of large alliances a fundamental aspect of the powder keg of World War I? And under what circumstances does a campaign seeking the liberation of totalitarian regime not violate the non-aggression principle, under which I assume Libertatem is generally unifed? I also find it hard to believe that a unanimously libertarian country would possess a large enough volunteer army to be capable of conquest, and even more unlikely to possess a bureaucracy capable of international development.

Pevvania, Rothbard Communities

I know, the war on Communism does not seem very libertarian to me either. Although, most in this region support it so it is a waste of time to constantly voice my opposition. I might as well shut up about it.

The American Empire In Libertatem wrote:I know, the war on Communism does not seem very libertarian to me either. Although, most in this region support it so it is a waste of time to constantly voice my opposition. I might as well shut up about it.

A war on communism, whatever it means in this particular context, is absolutely necessary, both on NationStates and in real life. As an Estonian, I can tell you a fundamental lesson reflected by the history of my homeland: if you don't hang the commie first, he'll hang you. (that said, the hanging part is obviously a metaphor, especially on NS) Unfortunately, my country had to learn this lesson the hard way. It should be clear by now that socialism, however peaceful, democratic and generally alluring it may appear, is inherently a threat to freedom and democracy. It must be destroyed in its embryonic stage until it is too late...This theory applies to NS as much as it applies to the real world. Making any compromises with the reds is a suicidal, and often irreversible, step towards self-destruction. Let's remember Mr. Churchill's words: "An appeaser will feed a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last."

You are mistaken if you think that the war on communism should be nothing more than a bloodshed. It must take many forms and be fought on multiple fronts. The reds are usually divided into 2 primary categories and each category requires a different approach and the war should be planned accordingly. The two categories are the ignorants and the evil ones. We must show to the ignorants that communism is an ideology of failure and pray that they grasp this undeniable fact. This can be done through basic education. As for the evil ones, we have to face the sad reality that these peoples' common desire is to ruin innocent lives and establish a statist, saddistic society. In order to prevent these twisted individuals from realizing their sick dreams, we must implement any measures deemed appropriate, even if they seem objectionable at first glance.

Kings Island, Pevvania, Scaliska

Reaganomic Nws wrote:A war on communism, whatever it means in this particular context, is absolutely necessary, both on NationStates and in real life. As an Estonian, I can tell you a fundamental lesson reflected by the history of my homeland: if you don't hang the commie first, he'll hang you. (that said, the hanging part is obviously a metaphor, especially on NS) Unfortunately, my country had to learn this lesson the hard way. It should be clear by now that socialism, however peaceful, democratic and generally alluring it may appear, is inherently a threat to freedom and democracy. It must be destroyed in its embryonic stage until it is too late...This theory applies to NS as much as it applies to the real world. Making any compromises with the reds is a suicidal, and often irreversible, step towards self-destruction. Let's remember Mr. Churchill's words: "An appeaser will feed a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last."

You are mistaken if you think that the war on communism should be nothing more than a bloodshed. It must take many forms and be fought on multiple fronts. The reds are usually divided into 2 primary categories and each category requires a different approach and the war should be planned accordingly. The two categories are the ignorants and the evil ones. We must show to the ignorants that communism is an ideology of failure and pray that they grasp this undeniable fact. This can be done through basic education. As for the evil ones, we have to face the sad reality that these peoples' common desire is to ruin innocent lives and establish a statist, saddistic society. In order to prevent these twisted individuals from realizing their sick dreams, we must implement any measures deemed appropriate, even if they seem objectionable at first glance.

There is a name for your ideology, mate: Fascism.

Rothbard Communities wrote:There is a name for your ideology, mate: Fascism.

Lol yea right, says the godamn statist...

Calling anyone you disagree with "fascist" sounds pretty legit (and leftist).

Reaganomic Nws wrote:A war on communism, whatever it means in this particular context, is absolutely necessary, both on NationStates and in real life. As an Estonian, I can tell you a fundamental lesson reflected by the history of my homeland: if you don't hang the commie first, he'll hang you. (that said, the hanging part is obviously a metaphor, especially on NS) Unfortunately, my country had to learn this lesson the hard way. It should be clear by now that socialism, however peaceful, democratic and generally alluring it may appear, is inherently a threat to freedom and democracy. It must be destroyed in its embryonic stage until it is too late...This theory applies to NS as much as it applies to the real world. Making any compromises with the reds is a suicidal, and often irreversible, step towards self-destruction. Let's remember Mr. Churchill's words: "An appeaser will feed a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last."

You are mistaken if you think that the war on communism should be nothing more than a bloodshed. It must take many forms and be fought on multiple fronts. The reds are usually divided into 2 primary categories and each category requires a different approach and the war should be planned accordingly. The two categories are the ignorants and the evil ones. We must show to the ignorants that communism is an ideology of failure and pray that they grasp this undeniable fact. This can be done through basic education. As for the evil ones, we have to face the sad reality that these peoples' common desire is to ruin innocent lives and establish a statist, saddistic society. In order to prevent these twisted individuals from realizing their sick dreams, we must implement any measures deemed appropriate, even if they seem objectionable at first glance.

What happens when the Imperialist Army of REATO conquers a region? All the puppets/region sitters may end up cteing but any active communist will either form a new region or join a larger communist region. What harm can a communist do in an online game? How would a communist oppress you? You are free to leave any region you wish and participate in any ideology you wish. The people in communist regions are only following their ideology,their opinion,and free will. We don't like it when the fascists or communists attack a capitalistic region yet we choose to play the same game of raiding and forcing each other to consolidate. There is no last battle on nationstates. A war on Communism will never end. So why don't we instead learn,debate,and understand one another?

A war on Communism in the real world may result in the fall of Communism,but in NationStates it is and waste of time. The only way we would have ended the Soviet occupation of Estonia would have been the execution of operation unthinkable. Ending the soviets before they got nuclear weapons. The allies did not have enough troops in Europe and it would have taken time for American reinforcements to arrive. In the meantime the soviets would have crushed the tired and outnumbered allied forces and would have captured most of Europe. I do sympathize with you on Estonia as Lithuania is one of the countries of my ancestors but there is nothing we could do about it.

Rothbard Communities, Landosenrego, Pangaean Debating Emissary

Actually I could had two other nations that I have ancestors from to the fold Germany and Poland. Yes any distant relatives that I had from those three counties may have suffered from communism but there was nothing that the allies could do about it.

Mad respect for your Estonian heritage, NWS. To my knowledge, Estonia has learned perhaps the most of former Soviet satellites, becoming one of the most economically advanced states in the Baltic. Hard earned wisdom, no doubt. In reference to Rothbard Communities's equation of an anti-communist campaign with fascism, I'm sure the Nazi-occupied Estonians didn't appreciate the alleged congruity of ideologies.

Pevvania wrote:So after hundreds of seizures and re-founds of communist territory, not to mention dozens of invasions, tag raids and infiltrations, the communists have been able to make their first ever territorial gain against us, in the form of a dead, founderless region that happened to once be a REATO member, Yerfilag. Meh.

If the economic illiterates manage to gain any real victories, I'll be in the bath tub.

???

In your tag raid of Islamic_Comintern didn't you say something like communists hit you, you hit back?

I am confused, there seems to be a contradiction.....

Pevvania wrote:You're -snip- a fascist -snip-

What do the reds -snip- fascistic crusade? -snip-

But it'll take a lot more than that to put a chink in our armour.

Don't know what you mean when you call him a fascist here.

Pev, when you say fascist crusade do you mean we are fascists?

Or, that we are going on a crusade against the fascists?

Well, the leftist militaries have caused you to lose embassies.

Rothbard Communities

Rothbard Communities wrote:Wow, you copy-pasted some text from some neoliberal economists.

I copy-pasted some text from a highly-respected World Bank study that reflects the academic consensus on privatisation.

Rothbard Communities wrote:I am not going to discuss about that absolutely stupid text you posted here...

Because you can't, and because your theories are fundamentally in opposition to empirical evidence.

Rothbard Communities wrote:all I can tell you is: You should maybe read some works of Joseph E. Stiglitz (nobel prize winner), Paul Krugman (another nobel prize winner), or Thomas Piketty (probably one of the next nobel prize winners). These are currently the most important economists worldwide, and what they say isn't exactly what you say.

Hitler was also one of the most important leaders, and Bernie Madoff was one of the most important investors. What's your point?

Stiglitz is obsessively anti-market and complains incessantly about income inequality, which is ridiculous because it's a static metric. Krugman is not an economist, he is a former economist who become a pundit. He's changed pretty much all of his positions in order to influence the political elite. Just look at his comments on the minimum wage from 1998 vs 2015:

"So what are the effects of increasing minimum wages? Any Econ 101 student can tell you the answer: the higher wage reduces the quantity of labour demanded, and hence leads to unemployment." - 1998

"There’s no excuse for wage fatalism. We can give American workers a raise if we want to." - 2015

Krugman's a hack now, but he used to do some very good work on international trade, for which he won the Nobel Prize. Yep, he won it based on advocacy for globalisation. Lol.

Piketty is another obsessive statist who fudged the numbers in his book to, once again, influence politicians to redistribute wealth.

But I think you're just name-dropping, and don't actually know who any of these people are. What fascist, erm, I mean, communist, likes economists that promote capitalism?

Rothbard Communities wrote:Oh, and by the way: I am 29, journalist, and have studied political science and...economics.

"I'm a male model with a big D, a six-pack and over $10 million worth of sports cars. How can I prove this? Because I'm saying it on the internet"

Miencraft, Kings Island, Humpheria In Libertatem, Midland County, Landosenrego, Reaganomic Nws

Republic Of Minerva wrote:and ad hominems.

err...

No one side is innocent of using ad hominems.

I'll respond to various TG'S soon. Working long shifts lately :p

Muh Roads wrote:I'll respond to various TG'S soon. Working long shifts lately :p

Like the one about changing your flag I sent, or at least making it make sense?

Rothbard Communities wrote:I and my entourage didn't have anything to do with the regions you listed. When CAPS was captured, I only started playing NS. Since then, nothing came from you. Funland wasn't made up by us, it had embassies with one of your military regions, Fort Colidge.

Fort Coolidge is the military base of the International Republican Union. It is not controlled by Libertatem.

Rothbard Communities wrote:Oh, and nobody fears you.

Clearly you do since you're trying so hard to damage us.

Rothbard Communities wrote:If someone would have to fear you, you wouldn't send silly messages to Comintern member.

That statement doesn't even make any sense.

Rothbard Communities wrote:I repeat myself: you are a really bad military director.

Do you actually have any evidence to prove this, or are you just going to keep plugging your fingers in your ears and slinging playground rhetoric?

Rothbard Communities wrote:Some time ago, Libertatem was a feared and respected region, but your glorious times are over.

What are you talking about? We're stronger than ever. I'd like to see you command a 30-endorser army for a single operation, mate.

Rothbard Communities wrote:Everybody is laughing at you, and especially at you, Pev.

Clearly you take us seriously, since you and your fellow members of the Pre-Teen Fascist Club have launched a mission to destroy us, which has failed horrendously.

Rothbard Communities wrote:You have been losing some of your biggest allies these last months,

More proof that you have no idea what you're talking about. Slavija and New Republica were friends but never "our biggest allies". Meanwhile, we put a stop to your pathetic attempt at invading The Hyatt Islands. Your pitiable 11 endorsers didn't do a thing.

Rothbard Communities wrote:you didn't manage to organise any attack

Islamic Comintern, Marxism Leninism. That's just the past week! :)

Rothbard Communities wrote:and...we are still waiting for the retaliation you announced. Pev, you are done. To all the other members of this region, I would recommend to change your military leader.

Do you realise how juvenile you sound? Please, go back to school, study some economics and wait for your balls to drop before coming back to the internet again. If you have any balls, that is. :)

Hallo Island

Landosenrego wrote:Who wants to enlighten me with the military ethics of Libertatem? I just read the remarkably coherent Second REAGAN Treaty, and the concepts of mutual defense and communist liberation are morally basic stances. I still would like to challenge them, though: wasn't the allure of large alliances a fundamental aspect of the powder keg of World War I? And under what circumstances does a campaign seeking the liberation of totalitarian regime not violate the non-aggression principle, under which I assume Libertatem is generally unifed? I also find it hard to believe that a unanimously libertarian country would possess a large enough volunteer army to be capable of conquest, and even more unlikely to possess a bureaucracy capable of international development.

I'm glad you've asked that question.

First and foremost, NationStates is an online game, so it's very different to real life. If I could, I would have turned Libertatem into an anarchist territory, but that could not possibly work, since the game is structured around states (the game is called 'Nation States' after all). My real life political views abhor war and generally oppose foreign interventionism. Indeed, World War I was caused by two powerful groups of empires clashing in Europe. But on this game, Libertatem was founded to campaign on a cause that aligns well with the NAP - to fight authoritarian, imperialistic communism. Since the leftist militaries of the game began their crusades long before we did, they were the initial aggressors, and we have come as if in the role of a private defense agency to confront and put an end to such aggressive activities. The War on Communism is consistent with the NAP, because the communists were the initial aggressors. Even to this day, we only target regions that direct or sponsor wars against other regions.

Miencraft, The New United States, Muh Roads, Landosenrego, Reaganomic Nws

Pangaean Debating Emissary wrote:err...

No one side is innocent of using ad hominems.

Would help if you could actually identify ad hominems, instead of just calling every mention of a character trait an ad hominem.

Rothbard Communities wrote:USSR state capitalism/"socialism" hasn't worked. Neither has capitalism. The ongoing financial and economic crisis is the best proof.

That's sort of like saying, "Michael Jackson was alive in 2003, so he must have caused the Iraq War." Capitalism had nothing to do with the financial crisis. It was the fault of state intervention and corporatism at the hands of the Federal Reserve and the Clinton and Bush Administrations, who used their monetary and regulatory powers to create an artificial real estate bubble, which caused economic collapse when it popped.

Rothbard Communities wrote:Wow. You haven't understood anything about economics.

A communist accusing somebody else of not understanding economics? http://i.imgur.com/TPeQmB6.jpg

Rothbard Communities wrote:And btw, writing an essay about free trade does not mean defending free trade.

Except the vast majority of economists, economic studies and peer-reviewed literature have agreed that free trade stimulates economic and income growth and poverty reduction.

The American Empire In Libertatem wrote:What happens when the Imperialist Army of REATO conquers a region? All the puppets/region sitters may end up cteing but any active communist will either form a new region or join a larger communist region. What harm can a communist do in an online game? How would a communist oppress you? You are free to leave any region you wish and participate in any ideology you wish. The people in communist regions are only following their ideology,their opinion,and free will. We don't like it when the fascists or communists attack a capitalistic region yet we choose to play the same game of raiding and forcing each other to consolidate. There is no last battle on nationstates. A war on Communism will never end. So why don't we instead learn,debate,and understand one another?

A war on Communism in the real world may result in the fall of Communism,but in NationStates it is and waste of time. The only way we would have ended the Soviet occupation of Estonia would have been the execution of operation unthinkable. Ending the soviets before they got nuclear weapons. The allies did not have enough troops in Europe and it would have taken time for American reinforcements to arrive. In the meantime the soviets would have crushed the tired and outnumbered allied forces and would have captured most of Europe. I do sympathize with you on Estonia as Lithuania is one of the countries of my ancestors but there is nothing we could do about it.

It seems like every domestic opponent of the War must misinterpret it. The War is simply a reaction to communist military crusades, so it is perfectly in line with the NAP. We have been friends with several peaceful communist regions in the past, such as The Communist Bloc, which contradicts the idea that we ruthlessly target socialist regions.

I like the idea of learning, debating and understanding one another, which is why I created Mont Pelerin Society. I recommend anyone of any ideological stripe or region to send a puppet there for political discussion.

Miencraft, Tyrinth, Hallo Island, Landosenrego

Even if the Communists started it, raiding regions is not the answer. We are just consolidating them,making them stronger and more united. If we want to defend democratic capitalist regions, then let's only use our military to defend our capitalist allies while keeping the commies in their smaller regions.

Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.