U.S. Politics, Elections & Culture issues

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Vangelovski
    Senior Member
    • Sep 2008
    • 8531

    Originally posted by Risto the Great View Post
    Surely Macao is the cradle of communism!

    I looked up the same statistics. Looking at average earnings without looking at GDP seems to be only telling half the story. I would contend that the countries that missed out on the benefits of the industrial revolution of the 18th and 19th centuries were more likely to be at the bottom of the list. Not sure we can blame the commies for everything, though I am sure some of that stench has stuck.
    Wasn't Macao under Portugese rule (and largely autonomous) until recently? I thought it had a similar deal to Hong Kong - two systems, one country. I might be wrong.

    Some of those countries, like the Czech Republic, Hungary and the Baltics did join the industrial revolution to an extent, but I think socialism killed whatever advantage they may have had among their eastern neighbours. Had they not experienced 50 years of socialism, I think they might have been much closer to the west in terms of economic development now.
    Last edited by Vangelovski; 09-22-2015, 06:37 AM.
    If my people who are called by my name will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sins and restore their land. 2 Chronicles 7:14

    The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people; a change in their religious sentiments, of their duties and obligations...This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people was the real American Revolution. John Adams

    Comment

    • Vangelovski
      Senior Member
      • Sep 2008
      • 8531

      Originally posted by Gocka View Post
      Numbers are not your forte my friend.
      The real question is whether they are your forte.

      Originally posted by Gocka View Post
      So lets start out with the first chart. Net wealth in billions. I'm going to assume that this basically means the net worth of all assets held by citizens of each country.
      The definition given by Credit Suisse was along the lines of Assets minus Liabilities.

      Originally posted by Gocka View Post
      In any comparison its always important to make sure you compare apples to apples.
      Really?? Because when it comes to guns, you seem to like comparing not only apples and oranges, but throw in some pears and bananas for good measure. Now you want apples with apples?

      Originally posted by Gocka View Post
      In this case in order for the numbers to make any sense you first need to account for population differences. Sweden for example has only 9.5 million residents compared to the USA which has 320 million.
      And hence the second table.

      Originally posted by Gocka View Post
      A quick calculation shows that if Sweden were the size of the USA its wealth would be 82054 billion which would basically put it level with the USA in new wealth.
      That’s a massive assumption…and yes, a very quick and very, very dirty calculation.

      Originally posted by Gocka View Post
      So we've established the wealth per capita is basically the same.
      Now lets dive into some specifics. The USA is blessed with an abundance of resources, almost every type of resource on the planet can be found in the USA. Oil, gas, coal, farmland, coasts, rivers, iron, copper, silver, gold, timber, minerals, you name it they have. You can grow anything, tropical foods in Florida and California, corn, wheat, and potatoes in the Midwest, cold weather foods in the north west. No other country on the planet, other than maybe Russia (limited to energy and minerals) can boast so much variety and quantity of resources. Even China which is a massive land mass, has only a tiny fraction of the resources, primarily energy that the USA has. What does this all mean? It means that no matter what kind of system you Have in place, the USA has a massive advantage to create wealth, it has shit to sell. Now what if you confined the USA to only one region within its current borders, what if the USA was only the Midwest, or only the north east, or only the west or south? Sweden on the other hand has very limited resources, it exports 0 oil. So it has to work much harder to generate economic activity. Still it manages to hold as much wealth per capita as the USA, that has basically every competitive advantage possible over Sweden. So Sweden for "communist nightmare" is actually quite the capitalist. Frankly after being forced by you to actually dig deeper, I was surprised at whole wealthy they are, and how well they have done with so few resources.
      Boo hoo. Nature and history are unforgiving. I think you completely understate the natural resources of Russia and China. I would have to look at the details, but I’d say that Russia at least has much more natural resources and capacity for agriculture than the US. The problem was socialism.

      In terms of Sweden, per capita wealth and GDP is virtually the same, but it doesn’t take an abundant land mass to produce wealth. Qatar, Luxemburg and Singapore are basically city states. The production of wealth has less to do with land mass and more do to with the economic and political systems in place, plus individual capabilities. You’ve tried to paint the US as some sort of dystopia and the Nordic models as much superior. That’s just ridiculous and the fact is that most of the Nordic countries are out-ranked by the US.

      Originally posted by Gocka View Post
      Norway either divided per capita (5 million citizens) or multiplied up to the US population, is actually wealthier than the USA at 86080.

      Denmark is the weakest of the Nordic trio with a scaled wealth of 71500. Putting it still firmly right behind the USA and Sweden with Norway leading.

      Japan 58,400

      China 4897 (third on the chart) but in real terms is probably near the bottom. This is a perfect illustration of why simply posting numbers, charts, and statistics, without context, or details is utterly useless and misleading.

      France 74200 (another supposed socialist hell hole not far behind the USA while again also not have a fraction of the resources and having many times more government benefits and very low amounts of hours worked.

      Canada 68571 Another socialist hell hole not too far behind the USA with a single payer healthcare system

      Switzerland, 142000, not that is not a typo, they have 70% more wealth per capita than the USA. Again a country with strong social benefits or a Social Democracy.

      Netherlands 51000

      Belgium 73570

      Austria 57300
      These are just fuzzy calculations based on the assumption that existing economic productiveness would flow through in the same proportions for a larger population.

      Originally posted by Gocka View Post
      Some of these are land locked and most have no natural resources to speak of and significant restrictions on what can be planted and produced, yet they still maintain high levels of wealth and social benefits. The USA ranks last in social benefits among the those top few.
      What do you mean by social benefits? If we’re moving into the warm and fuzzy, why can’t we look at more tangible factors such as freedom rankings? I know the only important factors for socialists are happy thoughts, but for some of us genuine freedom is ranked as a much more important factor.

      Originally posted by Gocka View Post
      So thank you for proving that some socialist ideas, can be successfully implemented and integrated with capitalist economies.
      Actually, the point was that your dystopian picture of the US is ridiculous. The US still ranks higher than most Nordic countries on all of the indicators I provided.

      Originally posted by Gocka View Post
      The second chart is a better way of looking at it which is basically what I calculated above, the only difference it says per Adult instead of per capita. Again context. Europe has an aging population, a larger proportion of their total population is an "adult" and that means you mathematically they are disadvantaged by that kind of calculation yet still Norway ranks higher than the USA and Sweden almost on par.
      Children don’t actually own much, if anything at all, so I would find it strange to include them. Further, if Norway’s population is ageing, then boo hoo – maybe socialism isn’t providing what’s necessary to reproduce?

      Originally posted by Gocka View Post
      Clearly the number show that despite Norway being "socialist" it hasn't harmed personal wealth, and economic success. I have to again stress it is amazing how well they do with in such a limited ability.
      And again, you’re dystopian vision of the US is ridiculous as it clearly outranks most Nordic countries.

      Originally posted by Gocka View Post
      Finally I'd even dispute the validity or at a minimum the relevance of these figures given that Greece, GREECE, let me say that again GREECE when factoring for population is 30,000??? So the the average Greek has 2.7 times less wealth than an American? Greece is a mere step above Macedonia in terms of salaries and wealth,
      The unfortunate reality is that Greece is actually more than a mere step above Macedonia in economic terms. Its just Macedonian mythologising that puts Greece at the same level economically. Its also politically much, much more mature.
      If my people who are called by my name will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sins and restore their land. 2 Chronicles 7:14

      The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people; a change in their religious sentiments, of their duties and obligations...This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people was the real American Revolution. John Adams

      Comment

      • Amphipolis
        Banned
        • Aug 2014
        • 1328

        Originally posted by Gocka View Post
        Finally I'd even dispute the validity or at a minimum the relevance of these figures given that Greece, GREECE, let me say that again GREECE when factoring for population is 30,000??? So the the average Greek has 2.7 times less wealth than an American? Greece is a mere step above Macedonia in terms of salaries and wealth,
        The ratio of welth (GDP per capita) between USA:Greece is indeed around 2,5:1 (latest data at the end of 2014).

        Comment

        • George S.
          Senior Member
          • Aug 2009
          • 10116

          How can you compare gdp when the country is in huge debt and is facing bankruptcy.
          Gdp means nothing if you can'r repay your debts.
          "Ido not want an uprising of people that would leave me at the first failure, I want revolution with citizens able to bear all the temptations to a prolonged struggle, what, because of the fierce political conditions, will be our guide or cattle to the slaughterhouse"
          GOTSE DELCEV

          Comment

          • Gocka
            Senior Member
            • Dec 2012
            • 2306

            Oh Thomas.

            The scaling up to account for population is the same as scaling down to per capita, its based on the same calculation. The point is simple, even though many of these countries are many times smaller, have high rates of social spending, have a fraction of the resources of the USA, they are disadvantaged in every aspect yet still do just fine economically.

            You fail to address why they are not failing? According to you social spending brings less "freedom" and will crumble any economy to the depths of Balkan countries? Why isn't that happening to 7 of the top 10 wealthiest nations who are heavily socialized? You love to boil down an argument to one question, here it is. Explain to us why these countries are not being dragged down despite their socialistic ways?

            How does Russia have more capacity for farming when most of its land mass is uninhabitable not to mention farmable? The USA has half a dozen different climates that you can grown almost anything on earth on. What can Russia grow wheat and potatoes, and ice? Russia has lots of energy and some minerals, but as a whole it is a dwarf to the USA. China for its size and population has a fraction of even Russia's natural resources. It has very little energy and a decent capacity for farming.

            Hold on let me dig out my freedom meter so we can rank countries by freedomness, I think its measured in the unit BS, or as its know to common folk as bullshit.

            By the way your the one who brought up the figures, so dont get pissy with me that they dont prove what you thought they did. The only reason I scaled up the first chart is because it was visually misleading. Ranking the Nordic countries way bellow China. If you were to imprint that information on a bar chart or line chart it would look even worse, which is why I constantly warn you about statistics.

            You fail to admit to what is the big elephant in the room, which is that the Nordic countries are quite socialist, quite stable, quite peaceful, and economically quite strong. All these facts go against your assertion that the sky will fall and we will eat stale bread if we strengthen social systems.

            Oh and Qatar? Yes its pretty tiny, and has more oil per capita than any other country on earth. Take away the oil and they are Macedonia. Its not boo hoo, but you are trying to attribute luck with nature, to economic and social systems, you are the one trying to make a correlation between things that are unrelated.

            Comment

            • Amphipolis
              Banned
              • Aug 2014
              • 1328

              Originally posted by George S. View Post
              How can you compare gdp when the country is in huge debt and is facing bankruptcy.
              Gdp means nothing if you can'r repay your debts.
              The debt crisis is reflected in all economic & social data. Greek GDP was reduced by around 25% since the beginning of the crisis and a new recession is expected now. Population was also reduced, so GDP per capita falls in a slower rate. Also, a critical decision on deleting or restructuring part of the debt is to be taken in the next months.

              Comment

              • DraganOfStip
                Senior Member
                • Aug 2011
                • 1253

                Originally posted by Gocka View Post
                The scaling up to account for population is the same as scaling down to per capita, its based on the same calculation. The point is simple, even though many of these countries are many times smaller, have high rates of social spending, have a fraction of the resources of the USA, they are disadvantaged in every aspect yet still do just fine economically.

                You fail to address why they are not failing? According to you social spending brings less "freedom" and will crumble any economy to the depths of Balkan countries? Why isn't that happening to 7 of the top 10 wealthiest nations who are heavily socialized? You love to boil down an argument to one question, here it is. Explain to us why these countries are not being dragged down despite their socialistic ways?
                Not only they're not going down,they're constantly up:






                Abstracts from the link:
                ...While Europe continues to
                grapple with slow growth, high unemployment, and unsustainable sovereign
                debt, the Nordic region has proven to be resilient to many of these issues.
                The region has maintained fiscal discipline and stability by closely governing
                its public finances, while still managing to provide high levels of social
                welfare to its citizens...
                • High Living Standards: The Nordic region is among the wealthiest in
                the world. With an average per capita GDP (in real terms) of $48,320
                in 2013, it ranked higher than the US ($45,863). In a report by the
                World Economic Forum, the Nordic countries were ranked among the
                top countries in education, training, labor market efficiency,
                technological readiness, etc. (Source: World Bank 2014,
                World Economic Forum 2014)
                • Strong Credit: The Nordic countries have a considerably low level of
                public debt. In the Nordic region, average government debt as a
                percentage of GDP was 43% in 2013, as compared to 105% for the
                US and 76% for the developed world in general. The region also
                achieved a current account surplus of 5.6% of GDP. All four countries
                were accorded the highest credit rating of AAA by S&P. (Source: IMF
                2014, Standard & Poor’s 2014)
                • Innovate Culture: Nordic economies have a strong culture of innovation.
                They introduced the world to mobile networks in the 1980s, and the GSM
                cell data standard in 1990s. Now, they are leading the way in employing
                green technology to provide sustainable energy. The governments of
                these economies employ a collaborative approach to funding green
                investments by selling excess electricity capacity to the rest of Europe
                (Source: Economist 2013, norden.com, 2013)
                • Consumption and Export Driven Growth: The region’s diverse exports
                are expected to increase in volume, by an average of 3.7% in 2015.
                The region is also expected to benefit from increase in real income;
                tax cuts combined with high consumer confidence in Denmark and a
                stronger labor market, fiscal incentives and restrained price developments
                in Sweden. Overall consumption is anticipated to grow by 1.6% per
                quarter in Denmark, in 2014, and 3.5% year on year in Sweden in
                2014. (Source: IMF 2015 estimates, Nordic Outlook, Danske Bank 2014)
                Originally posted by Gocka View Post
                How does Russia have more capacity for farming when most of its land mass is uninhabitable not to mention farmable? The USA has half a dozen different climates that you can grown almost anything on earth on. What can Russia grow wheat and potatoes, and ice? Russia has lots of energy and some minerals, but as a whole it is a dwarf to the USA. China for its size and population has a fraction of even Russia's natural resources. It has very little energy and a decent capacity for farming.
                Actually,China imports Russian gas because of lack of resources and is Russia's second largest gas partner (after most of Europe,of course).

                Originally posted by Gocka View Post
                Oh and Qatar? Yes its pretty tiny, and has more oil per capita than any other country on earth. Take away the oil and they are Macedonia. Its not boo hoo, but you are trying to attribute luck with nature, to economic and social systems, you are the one trying to make a correlation between things that are unrelated.
                And when there isn't oil (also Kuwait,the Emirates...),there is gambling (Monte Carlo/Monaco) or tourism (Andorra,San Marino...).
                Last edited by DraganOfStip; 09-22-2015, 08:53 AM.
                ”A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims... but accomplices”
                ― George Orwell

                Comment

                • Vangelovski
                  Senior Member
                  • Sep 2008
                  • 8531

                  Originally posted by Gocka View Post
                  Oh Thomas.

                  The scaling up to account for population is the same as scaling down to per capita, its based on the same calculation.
                  There is a big difference between your 'scaling up' and wealth/GDP per capita. Your ‘scaling up’ is based on imaginary numbers and the assumption that the level of wealth would increase proportionately based on existing levels. You’re looking at an imagined population and an imagined wealth level based on an assumption that could be disproved by thousands of factors.

                  The per capital wealth/GDP levels are based on actual data. It’s the actual wealth/GDP level divided by the actual population to obtain a mean (or average) as an indicator. This is why economists use these indicators rather than yours.

                  Originally posted by Gocka View Post
                  The point is simple, even though many of these countries are many times smaller, have high rates of social spending, have a fraction of the resources of the USA, they are disadvantaged in every aspect yet still do just fine economically.
                  Your original point was that the US is an economic basket case and that the Nordic countries are kicking its arse. In actual fact, the US is not a basket case and it outranks all Nordic countries except Norway on the standard economic indicators. And it kills (along with all other capitalist countries) current and former socialist states.

                  Originally posted by Gocka View Post
                  You fail to address why they are not failing? According to you social spending brings less "freedom" and will crumble any economy to the depths of Balkan countries? Why isn't that happening to 7 of the top 10 wealthiest nations who are heavily socialized? You love to boil down an argument to one question, here it is. Explain to us why these countries are not being dragged down despite their socialistic ways?
                  Which seven of which top ten countries are you talking about?

                  Originally posted by Gocka View Post
                  How does Russia have more capacity for farming when most of its land mass is uninhabitable not to mention farmable? The USA has half a dozen different climates that you can grown almost anything on earth on. What can Russia grow wheat and potatoes, and ice? Russia has lots of energy and some minerals, but as a whole it is a dwarf to the USA. China for its size and population has a fraction of even Russia's natural resources. It has very little energy and a decent capacity for farming.
                  If you look at the link below, you’ll see that Russia and the US have comparable land sizes which is cultivated:



                  In fact, you could add Russia, China and India and they would far exceed the US in cultivated land area but still fail to get even close in wealth or GDP per capita. So, I really don’t see how land mass has all that much to do with potential for productivity, particularly given the very wealth city states we have. Its more about their economic/political systems and individual capability.

                  Originally posted by Gocka View Post
                  Hold on let me dig out my freedom meter so we can rank countries by freedomness, I think its measured in the unit BS, or as its know to common folk as bullshit.
                  Actually, freedom can and is measured by the types of laws and regulations countries have. It’s a very real and objective measure, particularly when a state can coerce an individual to do something or not to do something.

                  Originally posted by Gocka View Post
                  By the way your the one who brought up the figures, so dont get pissy with me that they dont prove what you thought they did. The only reason I scaled up the first chart is because it was visually misleading. Ranking the Nordic countries way bellow China. If you were to imprint that information on a bar chart or line chart it would look even worse, which is why I constantly warn you about statistics.
                  I think they show exactly my point – YOU we saying that the US is an economic basket case and that they Nordic countries are far superior. They clearly are not and they are clearly outranked by the US on the standard economic indicators.

                  Originally posted by Gocka View Post
                  You fail to admit to what is the big elephant in the room, which is that the Nordic countries are quite socialist, quite stable, quite peaceful, and economically quite strong. All these facts go against your assertion that the sky will fall and we will eat stale bread if we strengthen social systems.
                  Have you now decided that the Nordic states are socialist? Until now you were claiming they were mixed sytems…

                  Originally posted by Gocka View Post
                  Oh and Qatar? Yes its pretty tiny, and has more oil per capita than any other country on earth. Take away the oil and they are Macedonia. Its not boo hoo, but you are trying to attribute luck with nature, to economic and social systems, you are the one trying to make a correlation between things that are unrelated.
                  Did you forget about Singapore and Macau? Qatar is more than just oil – you should look into it. If it was just about oil, then there are plenty of other small countries with more oil and less people.
                  If my people who are called by my name will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sins and restore their land. 2 Chronicles 7:14

                  The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people; a change in their religious sentiments, of their duties and obligations...This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people was the real American Revolution. John Adams

                  Comment

                  • Tomche Makedonche
                    Senior Member
                    • Oct 2011
                    • 1123

                    Originally posted by DraganOfStip View Post
                    Like I said,i didn't say it hasn't had it's fair share.
                    I don't think you read my posts correctly,I haven't denied that.
                    Having said that,from what you posted above,just a handful of those countries have less average salary than Macedonia.
                    Hell,even shitholes like Kosovo and Bosnia have salaries above Macedonian average,something that's very disappointing and sad to see.
                    What I was saying was that with the right people and right reforms countries have recovered quite well.
                    Something we're yet to see in our republic.
                    I was only trying to point out that even when looking solely at the average monthly wage as an indication of economic growth, only a minority of ex-socialist states can be relatively viewed in the positive. The majority based on this factor alone seem, perhaps somewhat “coincidentally”, to continue to fall within the same dismal category as Macedonia. Regardless, as I previously mentioned, and Risto pointed out, looking at average monthly salaries alone only provides a portion of the whole picture. I generally agree that with the right people, right reforms, along with a number of other factors such as right outlook and an engaged citizenry, recovery that benefits all can happen, however, out of all ex-socialist states, only a handful appear to have relatively done this, which means its something that we are yet to see in the majority of ex-socialist states not just Macedonia, which begs the question: why?
                    Last edited by Tomche Makedonche; 09-22-2015, 08:27 PM.
                    “There’s a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can’t take part, you can’t even passively take part, and you’ve got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus and you’ve got to make it stop, and you’ve got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you’re free, the machine will be prevented from working at all” - Mario Savio

                    Comment

                    • Vangelovski
                      Senior Member
                      • Sep 2008
                      • 8531

                      Originally posted by Tomche Makedonche View Post
                      I was only trying to point out that even when looking solely at the average monthly wage as an indication of economic growth, only a minority of ex-socialist states can be relatively viewed in the positive. The majority based on this factor alone seem, perhaps somewhat “coincidentally”, to continue to fall within the same dismal category as Macedonia. Regardless, as I previously mentioned, and Risto pointed out, looking at average monthly salaries alone only provides a portion of the whole picture. I generally agree that with the right people, right reforms, along with a number of other factors such as right outlook and an engaged citizenry, recovery that benefits all can happen, however, out of all ex-socialist states, only a handful appear to have relatively done this, which means its something that we are yet to see in the majority of ex-socialist states not just Macedonia, which begs the question: why?
                      The other pertinent question is why ex-socialist states are even that far behind in the economic terms to begin with. The way socialists carry on here these countries should be soaring ahead while other countries are trying to catch up.
                      If my people who are called by my name will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sins and restore their land. 2 Chronicles 7:14

                      The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people; a change in their religious sentiments, of their duties and obligations...This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people was the real American Revolution. John Adams

                      Comment

                      • DraganOfStip
                        Senior Member
                        • Aug 2011
                        • 1253

                        Originally posted by 777Bitola View Post
                        Because companies HAD to provide benefits and health insurance to anyone working at least 31 hours, regardless of weather they need it or not. This caused a lot of places to cut peoples hours working a weed by in half, I ended up working 40 hours a week down to 20 a week and it was by far the best job I've held.
                        Companies always seem to find a way to bend the rules without breaking them (or as we say in Macedonia "finding and exploiting the holes in the law").
                        In your case your employer reduced your working hours to avoid paying the health insurance,but legally speaking he can't be held liable.

                        In Macedonia things like these are common practice.
                        I don't know if any of you lived in MK during Yugoslavia,where people would get the popular K-15 (an extra wage in a calendar year,roughly calculated in the amount of the country's minimal wage).
                        This was overruled in the early 1990's until last year when it became mandatory again for the private companies,companies that wouldn't pay k-15 to their workers would be severely penalized.
                        Having in mind this is a very hard time for the Macedonian citizen where people are struggling to make ends meet ,this decision was gteeted with enthusiasm form all workers.
                        Some companies did pay their workers properly and I salute those who did so (after all,the best way to stimulate your workers to be happy and more productive is cash),but a significant number of them were finding ways to bend the rule and avoid that.

                        Some companies did pay the amount but ordered their workers to refund it personally the next day,those that didn't would be fired (and some indeed were).

                        Others were even more cunning.It is common practice here to pay a certain amount of the wage (say three quarters or more) on the workers' account and the rest in an envelope on-hand (this is undeclared cash to the authorities,or as we say на црно).
                        These companies stopped giving the envelopes and paid the full wage on the workers' account until the K-15 amount was reached.
                        Once that had been done,they continued with the old method,so in the eyes of the law,they had fulfilled their duty but in reality the workers didn't see a dime of their K-15.

                        Other companies would declare the holiday bonuses (christmas & new yar,easter etc) which were usually given in envelopes (again,на црно) as the K-15...

                        This year however after the boo-hoo's and complaints of the company owners the K-15 was converted from a "mandatory" thing to "recommended" thing,meaning that it's on a voluntary basis and no charges would be filed against companies that decide not to pay it.
                        It's always about profit,isn't it?
                        Last edited by DraganOfStip; 09-23-2015, 03:05 AM.
                        ”A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims... but accomplices”
                        ― George Orwell

                        Comment

                        • George S.
                          Senior Member
                          • Aug 2009
                          • 10116

                          I was of the firm believer to invest in Macedonia and Macedonia will be better for it.My relatives have said in any venture you start.There is no encouragement despite of what they say they will tax the shit out of you.You can't really prosper like that.
                          "Ido not want an uprising of people that would leave me at the first failure, I want revolution with citizens able to bear all the temptations to a prolonged struggle, what, because of the fierce political conditions, will be our guide or cattle to the slaughterhouse"
                          GOTSE DELCEV

                          Comment

                          • DraganOfStip
                            Senior Member
                            • Aug 2011
                            • 1253

                            Here's something that would totally work in the USA.
                            On the right you have a pillow colored in the colors of the Dutch flag,it costs 15 euros.
                            Then on the left you have the same pillow rotated in 90 degrees,thus becoming the French flag.It now costs 34,90 euros
                            The article has a satirical title "market economy".
                            This is Capitalism 101

                            ”A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims... but accomplices”
                            ― George Orwell

                            Comment

                            • DraganOfStip
                              Senior Member
                              • Aug 2011
                              • 1253

                              GDP chart of Nordic countries compared to other European countries (bottom 2 lines are not Nordic countries):



                              The Nordic economies are among the countries in the Western World with the best macroeconomic performance in the recent ten years. Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden have for example experienced constant and large excess exports in recent years...
                              Over the past ten years, the Nordic countries had a noticeably larger increase in their gross domestic product (GDP) than the eurozone...
                              Measured by GDP per capita, the Nordic countries have a higher income than the Eurozone countries. Norway’s GDP per capita is as high as 80 per cent above the EA17 average, and Norway is actually one of the countries with the highest standard of living in the world..
                              Source: Haagensen, Klaus Munch (2013-11-27). Nordic Statistcal Yearbook 2013. Nordic Council. p. 99
                              ”A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims... but accomplices”
                              ― George Orwell

                              Comment

                              • Amphipolis
                                Banned
                                • Aug 2014
                                • 1328

                                Originally posted by Vangelovski View Post
                                I think socialists talk about greed a lot, but forget that wanting other people’s property, whether its money or something else, is greed in and of itself.


                                ==

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X