Post Archive
Region: Libertatem
Highly unlikely
Post self-deleted by Pevvania.
Na
Fun fact: Sornia is a childish plagiarist. Of all the figures on the left to rally behind, he is surely not one of them.
After days of searching I think I've found my Nation's home. You guys are hilarious.
I adore the sudden rush of generically named puppets we've gotten. Welcome, guys! Did you enjoy the Internationale's article?
Congratulations on one week in office, CI!
I survived!
Survived but you have not lived
That part comes next week.
https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/10406791_948430571851279_1853638021518336466_n.png?oh=9a61f731edc516f88dcc27062ca3cd85&oe=55274D19&__gda__=1430308211_12e32b8cd84471c124b92c28fc94364c
Haha! Very accurate.
Win
The trouble in The Leftist Union and USSR really is amusing. The Bolsheviks can barely manage each other, let alone their own regions.
Kebebasania
[B]Reagan and the Deficit[/B]
Reagan gets a lot of the flak for growing the deficit during the 1980s. But the reality is more complicated than that. According to an Institute of Policy Innovation Study, if Congress had agreed to President Reagan's 1989 budget, the deficit in dollars for that year would have been reduced to -$104 billion, just under what it was in 1996 under Clinton, two years before a surplus was achieved; in other terms, as a percentage of GDP the deficit would have been -1.8% in 1989. Instead, Congress spent $49 billion above what Reagan proposed, and the deficit was reduced only to -2.7% of GDP. Congress actually outspent Reagan's budget proposals during every year of his Presidency, outspending him by over $257 billion in total. Nevertheless, the deficits accrued during his first term in office were cut down significantly by the end of his second - between 1985 and 1989 the deficit was cut nearly in half in real terms, from -5% of GDP to -2.7%. The largest year-on-year deficit reduction occurred in 1987, when the budget deficit was cut by $71 billion from -$221 billion to -$150 billion, or from -4.9% of GDP to -3.1%. A one-year deficit reduction that large or larger was not seen at any other point since the 1940s, except for 1951, 1960, 1969 and 2013.
The mean yearly deficit reduction as a percentage of GDP between 1986 and 1989 was 0.55%, and if that trend had continued into the 1990s, the federal government would have delivered a budget surplus of approximately 0.05% of GDP in 1994, four years before the 'Clinton surplus' of 1998. The figures are even more astounding when you use Reagan's proposed budgets as a baseline - his second term budgets proposed deficit reductions worth 0.925% of GDP, and if Congress had not only accepted all of these for fiscal years 1986-89 but also continued to reduce the deficit each year by a similar rate, a budget surplus worth 0.05% of GDP would have been achieved in FY 1991. However, despite President Bush facing a Congress with slightly more Republicans in it than during Reagan's last two years in office, he was never serious about reducing the deficit - every budget proposal he submitted asked to expand the deficit, and Congress responded by enlarging it even further. For the 1992 budget, Congress actually spent $56 billion under what Bush proposed. So the next time there was a serious chance at reducing the deficit was when Clinton became President, although, as the data below shows, he does not exactly have a spotless record when it comes to cutting spending.
Reagan may hold a lot of the blame for expanding the deficit and spending above normal levels during the 1980s, but he also deserves a lot of the credit for getting both of those at much lower levels during his second term.
1986 PROPOSED REAGAN DEFICIT: -$205 billion, -4.5% of GDP
1987 PROPOSED REAGAN DEFICIT: -$140 billion, -2.92% of GDP
1988 PROPOSED REAGAN DEFICIT: -$115 billion, -2.22% of GDP
1989 PROPOSED REAGAN DEFICIT: -$104 billion, -1.8% of GDP
1990 BASELINE REAGAN DEFICIT: -$51 billion, -0.875% of GDP
1991 BASELINE REAGAN DEFICIT: +$3 billion, +0.05% of GDP
1990 PROPOSED BUSH DEFICIT - -$165 billion, -2.79% of GDP
1991 PROPOSED BUSH DEFICIT - -$178 billion, -2.91% of GDP
1992 PROPOSED BUSH DEFICIT - -$346 billion, -5.3% of GDP
1993 PROPOSED BUSH DEFICIT - -$251 billion, -3.69% of GDP
http://www.ipi.org/docLib/reagandf.pdf-OpenElement.pdf
http://federal-budget.findthebest.com/
Indeed. They may as well surrender to us now so we can get back to work fighting the Nazis.
Communist infighting. What a surprise.
*drops pin*
*hears it*
Beautiful. As if the USSR, Cuba, and North Korea weren't enough proof that communism doesn't work.
*State Socialist.
http://rt.com/usa/221015-obama-free-community-college/
Great, now the taxpayers have to pay for something that's supposed to be "free."
You know what else is free? Slavery.
We should reinstitute slavery.
http://www.quickmeme.com/img/59/595a97eb73c0e2fa3d2f83d3e8e6420e2f4bbe7b0d8417c0f171c67aab413f63.jpg
Fun fact: there were white slaves in America.
We just don't call them slaves, but technically they were.
Until Louis XIV Noir Coda white slaves were common. In the Mediterranean white slaves still existed until the 1700s. Blacks were just easier and cheaper for the French to obtain and use on their death trap sugar plantations and so they did. Africans sol other conquered tribes and their defeated enemies and they were abundant, as wrong as it is it made sense to make slavery a predominant one "race" thing.
Pretty much, yeah.
What's our stance on Democratic Socialist Assembly.
They're inept and apparently blind. Is there much more to say?
Not particularly friendly... There have been raids on both sides and they have often shown their support for thoroughly undemocratic NK.
I believe they were involved in CAPS, which was a venture lead by the totalitarian left.
When I think of "democratic socialism," I think of Sweden and France. They may have differences in terms of economic policy, but when were France and Sweden ever aligned with the USSR? Another bizarre example of blind loyalty to an artificial political spectrum... without consideration for basic democratic principles.
I personally believe that Muslims should pay back my race for almost a thousand years of slavery.
I'm only quoting this because it was directly after my post, I'm new here, are puppet nations seriously that big of a deal?
Remove kebab?
Post self-deleted by Miencraft.
We tend to have a few spies floating around, so naturally we get suspicious of nations with generic names.
Fortunately none of the spies actually learn anything valuable, and honestly I don't even know why they try.
Puppets themselves aren't really that big of a deal. I myself have one sitting around here somewhere, actually.
lol that's like trying to spy on a country by sitting in a random coffee shop.
Morning everybody.
Wanna hear something funny? Even if Congress raises the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour, inflation will still make this increase utterly worthless within a few short years :)
It's our job to fight these racist, anti-workers' rights, anti-poor laws tooth and nail.
But Pev, Aussie big macs only cost 4 cents more in Australia than the US and the have a lot higher minimum wage.
Unions?
At the request of our Chief Diplomat, Libertatem displays "Je Suis Charlie" in support of France in the face of this spineless Islamic attack.
How is that racist? Races don't exist there just made up boundaries people in power used at a time to make them better than others, and to give them an excuse to master other people.
I thought it was only one cent more expensive. But this doesn't stop everything in that country being so mindlessly expensive. The exorbitant cost of goods there is known as the Australia Tax. In fact, if you make cost-of-living adjustments through PPP, Australia's $15 minimum wage is only worth $9.77 in US dollars. http://rare.us/story/opposite-of-america-is-full-of-even-more-lies/
I think the effects of minimum wage laws are exaggerated on both sides of the debate. I think in the grand scheme of things they matter very little, since wages rise anyway in a booming economy and these laws usually affect a very small proportion of the labour force. Most of the damage, of course, is done to low-skilled, minority and youth workers, who are in many cases thrown out of the labour force as a result of these wretched regulations.
What about unions?
Of course. The pigment of someone's skin is meaningless. But MW laws are racist in the same way that the Drug War is, in that they disproportionately affect minorities, which the elite knows, but refuses to confront.
Fair point
#JesuisCharlie
Citizens, residents, and observers of Libertatem;
The Leftist Union became founderless two days ago. Their military leader, a nation responsible for carrying out tag raids on our allies, and his puppets were deleted by site moderators for reasons unclear. As a result of this, a region once responsible for harassing us, bullying our friends, and engaging in espionage across NationStates has collapsed. Many eyes have turned to our region, wondering what we intend to do about it, or what part we've already played in their destruction. Though I could have devised a way to take advantage of this incident, to find some sort of military victory here, or to kick the residents of TLU while they're down, I've decided against it. Opportunism has its place and time, but this isn't it.
Instead of interfering, we are to keep our distance and let them evacuate in peace.
There are individuals who oppose this decision, no doubt. After all, we have been in a state of war with them for some time; never have they extended the olive branch of peace our way, nor offered us, nor our allies, any kind of mercy. They are the enemy, yet I'm leaving them alone? Indeed, I expect my position to be met with controversy.
Lest we forget, they just lost both a region and a friend in the blink of an eye, and not as the result of any action on our part. We are a region that fights for justice, after all, so I hope that it is clear that exploiting this weakness we played no part in creating would be a gross injustice. Meeting their past hostility with present cruelty will only serve to harm all of us - two wrongs do not make a right. I've seen enough communities crumble and regions fall to know that The Leftist Union has lost enough. It does not fall to us to finish them off.
To the other inconstant communist regions who have declared war on Libertatem and her allies, now hear this: No region is invincible, especially not you. You've seen this with your own eyes. If you want to profess anti-revisionism, anti-capitalism, and anti-liberalism, know that your active founders, passwords, and even WA nations are not an impenetrable defense from the enemies those policies will make. There will always be regions like Libertatem to oppose you, circumstances you can't foresee to ruin you, and failures within your systems to hold you back, but only as long as you continue a legacy of hatred, warfare, and evil. There's still a chance for you - you can lay down your arms against all fellow anti-fascists and maintain your sovereignty, your stability, and your camaraderie. You can set aside your grudge against liberalism and libertarianism, and you will not be completely alone when more malevolent forces come knocking at your door. You can embrace peace, and it will be extended to you. But if you intend to take through war what you cannot win in debate, if you plan to destroy that which you cannot comprehend, if you persist in making an enemy of Libertatem and regions like it, you have my guarantee that it will surely result in your destruction.
People of Libertatem, it's time that we, too, bury a hatchet of our own - I have informed my Cabinet that I would like to strike Article VIII from the Constitution and end our legal mandate to continue the outmoded War on Communism. We know better than to assume all communists are our enemies, or that our regional identity depends on ideological disputes. I will have more to say on this matter in the coming days.
And to the people of TLU, we in Libertatem mourn the premature death of your region with you - though your region's disbandment was inevitable, you were still a worthy adversary. We lament the loss of your friend, Lipno - if only he would have used his perseverance and determination for niceness, instead of rottenness.
Thank you, and God bless.
This is digusting. These guys are basically celebrating the killings:
http://www.nationstates.net/page=display_region_rmb/region=united_empire_of_islam?postid=9347111#p9347111
Post self-deleted by Humpheria.
I said in my campaign that I intended to end the War on Communism and promote peace where possible, and I know there are many here who share this intention.
This starts with resisting the temptation to act as vultures; jealously snagging the remains of former combatants would accomplish little, and only fuel more resentment in the long run.
There's always those groups that support the violence, its the one thing that lets them feel just and helps perpetuate their cause. It is disgusting.
The terrorists have been killed. The hostage is alive.
Vive la France.
Thanks for letting me know, I had been curious. I was watching the situation this morning.
Vive la France.
Looks like four people were killed at the market in Paris. Not specified if that includes the gunman or not.
The gunman has been killed too. 4 hostages are dead, apparently there is a link between the terrorists who killed the 12 journalists and this guy.
Yeah, and he also shot a local police intern, in her back...
France seems to be a little chaotic nowadays.
One of my friends in France told me that this is like their 9/11. They aren't leaving their house.
I got involved in a lively debate between a couple non-US friends who happen to be from Muslim countries. One of my friends was arguing in favor of free speech and the other, while condemning the violence, had been upset by some of the cartoons. I gave my opinion on the matter and thought I should share it here:
Suppose I've got two rotten, spoiled kids. One of them says something nasty to the other and the other kid responds by hauling off and smacking him.
First, I'm going to punish the kid who did the smacking and then I'm going to tell him, "I was going to reprimand the other kid for saying something rude, but now because of your actions, he's not in trouble any more!"
The moment it became dangerous to criticize Islam (the idea/philosophy/religious practice, which is different from criticizing all Muslim people) any sort of objections I might have to the offensiveness of such statements disappeared. The moral of the story is that if somebody says something you don't like, it's in your own interest to make sure that they are permitted to speak in freedom and safety, so we can denounce the bastards in good time. In simpler terms, "Use your words!"
Case in point: The Jewish lawyers who defended a bunch of neo-nazis' right to march in Skokie.
http://www.kansaspress.ku.edu/strwhe.html
The only correct response to offensive or distasteful speech is more speech.
Miencraft, Conservative Idealism In Libertatem, Plain Country Of Gurira
I'll probably go back to France to participate to the march, there will be Cameron, Merkel, Hollande and Renzi. It's good to see my fellows Europeans united for once.
After the thing that happened at the grocery store I can't blame them it must seem like no place is safe
No place is safe in Paris.
Case and point:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e7b_1420820113
I also founded [region=Je Suis Charlie], so the Islamists didn't get to it first. Yrellian, do you want to take control of the place? It would be more appropriate for a French person to be in control of such a region instead of some goofy American.
Good thinking - better to create a memorial for the victims of the Charlie Hebdo shooting than to give terrorist sympathizers a chance to defile the name here on NationStates.
Can't even believe people think like this
http://imgur.com/eMaBnWX
A good idea... That's why someone more personally connected to the event should be the one to make it.
Gotta be trolling...
Troll hard
It has to be...I initially found it on some super-right wing page someone shared on Facebook and my initial reaction was that it was a troll
Whether or not this is a troll, it's despicable nonetheless.
Personally, I see Islam as a vile, fascistic ideology drafted by a pedophilic tyrant; a man so "peaceful" that he launched a murderous war to conquer Arabia under his own empire; a man so "tolerant" that he marched into cities and destroyed Pagan temples and any traces of other religious.
However, this does not mean that I don't like Muslims. I have several Muslim friends. We should not treat Muslims as part of another race, but rather, adherents to a different ideology. Anything less just denigrates into either mindless bigotry or endless accusations of racism.
Not to sound rude but you are flat out wrong on that view. Mohammed never wanted people to be killed he had a line about being peaceful and caring to the nonbelievers. Just like Christianity it has been perverted as a reason to get away with killing people. The nut job extremists are pulling the murder the infidels from a poorly found source, basically they pull it out of their ass. When I say bad I mean like my cousin's uncle heard it from a guy that heard it from his half brother, and he heard it from his 3rd wife that knew a guy, who knew a guy that once talked to Mohammed.
Indeed - from my understanding, that religion has different interpretations (though not to the extent Christianity does). The vast majority of Muslims seem not to support the violent actions and crimes of the very vocal minority (at least, openly), and instead regard any "holy war" they are called to fight in as an internal, spiritual conquest than a morally reprehensible crusade. Such an idea is completely lost on the zeal and extremism of terrorists and their sympathizers.
She is a complete retard.
I am open to the idea that the Qu'ran is non-violent. I have not done much research into it. But there can be no question that Muhammad was in the same category as Genghis Khan and the other feudalist warmongers of the medieval era. Read the Wikipedia entry on Muhammad if you don't believe me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad
He raped children, slaves, average women, he beheaded Jews, he murdered his rivals, he tortured prisoners, he tortured and murdered a Jewish king to find the location of his treasure. He was a barbarian who would literally march into a village, massacre all adult males, and then enslave the women and children. He was a horrible, horrible, horrible person who'd be rotting in hell.
[nation=conservative_idealism_in_libertatem], I applaud your decision to end the "war on communism" and leave the Leftist Unin alone. I feel that this is the best decision you could have taken.
All religious scriptures from the pre-modern era contain horrific features, since they were products of a barbaric time in human history. The old testament is rife with genocide, rape, murder and much of it is either facilitated by God or committed by his prophets.
The main problem with the Middle Eastern / Central Asian Islamic world is that the region's political movements of Pan-Arabism/Pan-Islamism formed at a time when the main ideologies in Europe were Bolshevism and Fascism. These ideas were absorbed into the burgeoning Pan-Arab movement and eventually combined with the various flavors of fundamentalist Islam that had always existed there. Since then, the main political movements of the Arab/Islamic world have been contaminated by totalitarianism, conspiracy theory-type thinking, victimhood, and anti-Semitism.
For a better understanding of the roots of the Pan-Arabic Movement, which evolved into the Islamist ideology we're dealing with today, I suggest you read about Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haj_Amin_al-Husseini
Hey. Does this region have room for centre rightist market liberals?
We've got room for everyone, buddy! Welcome!
Great! Well, I'm glad to be here.
I think it's a terrible decision, but that's why freedom is great.
The President has not reneged on his campaign promise to continue the War on Communism. The Reaganist Libertarian Party will fight tooth and nail to stop this travesty from passing.
Note on the RLP's position on the War: we have not supported an unconditional war on communism for years now. Our views are in line with the policy of the past five administrations: that Bolsheviks (militant Stalinists and vanguardists) and fascists should be fought and confronted wherever they are, and peaceful/friendly leftist regions willing to co-exist should be extended the hand of friendship. We are open to a name change, but on a purely unofficial basis. Striking Article VIII is to compromise the heart and soul of the region.
*applause*
*slow clap....*
Hello
Pretty much this.
This guy's cool. He's not one of the recent spies. I can vouch.
Can, in ten days you can apply for Citizenship to become a voting member of Libertatem.
Quick question, does this region raid other regions? Because, I'm staunchly opposed to raids.
Oh yeah, no one could ever possibly be in favor of this region's principles. Everyone enjoys pissing away everything we stand for and have stood for since our conception.
Totally not one of the recent spies. Avert your eyes, guys. Nothing to see here.
What? I'm pretty certain this region conducts raids, after reading about it. I'm just wondering if that's the case, because if so, I'll find a different region, and wish all of you the best...
Yeah, we do. But you don't have to participate if you don't want to. They've all got a justification - fighting the Evil Empire.
Eh, fair enough, then. I read a bit more about your region, and it seems that y'all raid communist regions. But, to be honest, this region seems a bit to right wing for me. I'm a centre rightist, but I don't consider myself a libertarian, and this region may not be a good fit. Anyways, it was good meeting some of y'all.
Liberals...
Pev, your sheer lack of knowledge to differentiate between State Socialism and Communism surprises me. All of these regions are Socialist. If they were communism, there would be an anarcho-communism esque situation, much like Makhnovia.
Send me a wall of text like usual, i'm ready this time.
Yes, because it's really crucial that we differentiate between "state socialism" and "communism" while fighting the tyrannical left.
If you don't care, fine. I see a lack of knowledge, ignorance or both.
Oh the irony.
Does it matter if it's a Marxist in service to the USSR puts a gun to your head or some street punk with a black flag?
Both sides repudiate the NAP, as they are for aggression. They are for not liberty, but tyranny.
Prove me wrong then.
I rest my case, it's ignorance.
I'm all for getting the authoritarian left. In that case, we should have called it the War on Authoritarianism then.
So you missed it entirely.
Ignorance is lack of knowledge.
"The name isn't politically correct therefore we should change it"
Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.