POLITICS & DONALD Annoying Orange MEGATHREAD

[Nonnel]

the nordic model, a mixed economy with a strong welfare state, seems to be the best solution. the rich don't get too rich and the poor don't get too poor.

[Ad Bot]

[Karl Marx]

the nordic model, a mixed economy with a strong welfare state, seems to be the best solution. the rich don't get too rich and the poor don't get too poor.

Sure, it's a step in the right direction, but it might not even work in the United States.
Nor is it any more sustainable than Capitalism is on its own. The pursuit of profit and infinite growth will inevitably collapse, as it has time and time again. Allowing rich people to amass substantially larger portions of resources than they need to puts a massive strain on an economy trying to uphold a liberal welfare state.

[Acerblock]

the nordic model, a mixed economy with a strong welfare state, seems to be the best solution. the rich don't get too rich and the poor don't get too poor.

Agreed, but it still should be fine tuned for this country.

[IkeTheGeneric]

Nor is it any more sustainable than Capitalism is on its own.

I don't know if this is your ironic facade because at this point you're a walking poe's law, but jesus loving christ it's so hard to take your stupid rants seriously

You keep droning on about the logical conclusion of capitalism without having any firsthand knowledge of economical forecasting, it's almost as if your prospected idea of how capitalism will supposedly collapse is just unfounded conjecture.

[Drydess]

the nordic model, a mixed economy with a strong welfare state, seems to be the best solution. the rich don't get too rich and the poor don't get too poor.

i don't think that would work with the population density of our country. norway, sweden, etc are all countries that are large in size but have like 50 people living there lol

[e-maxx]

kimon irl

[Cappytaino]

i don't think that would work with the population density of our country. norway, sweden, etc are all countries that are large in size but have like 50 people living there lol

They also are culturally, ethnically, and linguistically homogenous.

It's easy to make the Nordic model work when you have such a low population density, a defense budget subsidized by NATO, and no cultural differences within your own borders

[Drydess]

there isn't any perfect government system of the future
the best society that we could get that would "work" per se is one where none of us have a preferable amount of freedoms

[Doughboy]

They also are culturally, ethnically, and linguistically homogenous.

It's easy to make the Nordic model work when you have such a low population density, a defense budget subsidized by NATO, and no cultural differences within your own borders

so is sweden homogenous or overrun with immigrants

[Karl Marx]

I don't know if this is your ironic facade because at this point you're a walking poe's law, but jesus loving christ it's so hard to take your stupid rants seriously

You keep droning on about the logical conclusion of capitalism without having any firsthand knowledge of economical forecasting, it's almost as if your prospected idea of how capitalism will supposedly collapse is just unfounded conjecture.

If our economy continues down the same road it has been travelling, how will would an economic collapse be unfathomable? It's not like the system is a stranger to economic recessions/depressions. Here's some theoretical scenarios:

1. The top 1% continues to amass wealth uninhibited, labor reforms come slowly if at all. The middle class collapses, unable to keep up with the widening wealth gap.

2. Capitalism inevitably continues to expand, consuming resources faster than they could ever be replenished. The environment is destroyed, society collapses.

3. Major companies go bankrupt as the resources they sell begin to run out, the economy loses a lot of steam.

4. Major countries get into violent conflicts over scarce resources, which would end up about as well as you would expect it to.

5. Government becomes more imperialist / fascist in order to strong arm resources from other countries or to enforce a status quo as civil unrest arises. Both would probably lead to revolution.

[Red Spy]

1. The top 1% continues to amass wealth uninhibited

why do you always jerk yourself off about the 1%

[Kearn]

1. The top 1% continues to amass wealth uninhibited

so how come this is bad

2. Capitalism inevitably continues to expand, consuming resources faster than they could ever be replenished. The environment is destroyed, society collapses.

as opposed to communism which just simply opts for mass purges and famine because of mismanagement of resources

3. Major companies go bankrupt as the resources they sell begin to run out, the economy loses a lot of steam.

major companies exploit new reserves and produce new technologies to extract more resources*

4. Major countries get into violent conflicts over scarce resources

AKA how the world has always worked

5. Government becomes more imperialist / fascist in order to strong arm resources from other countries or to enforce a status quo as civil unrest arises. Both would probably lead to revolution.

ah yes a communist revolution would occur which would inevitably result in egalitarian utopia and not an authoritarian dictatorship

[Deus Ex]

so is sweden homogenous or overrun with immigrants

...Jesus Christ

[Karl Marx]

why do you always jerk yourself off about the 1%

I'll put it this way: Conservatives like you always piss and moan about how transgender people are getting special treatment from the government despite having such a small population. It's like that, except the top one percent actually directly controls most, if not all, political trends / legislature. Ain't it weird that every single time Mickey Mouse's copyright is about to expire, a new Copyright Extension law is passed?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act

[Karl Marx]

so how come this is bad

Do I have to spell it out? A group staunchly opposed to coughing up the working peoples' wages necessary for their survival gaining more and more political power would slowly kill the middle class.

as opposed to communism which just simply opts for mass purges and famine because of mismanagement of resources

Nothing about Socialism inherently involves the mismanagement of resources. You're referring to the individual failings of different states.

major companies exploit new reserves and produce new technologies to extract more resources*

Yeah thank god there's no dying industries holding significant power in the government actively preventing the transition to sustainable energy.

AKA how the world has always worked

Last time I checked, nuclear warheads weren't involved in these disputes, historically.

ah yes a communist revolution would occur which would inevitably result in egalitarian utopia and not an authoritarian dictatorship

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Catalonia
It's not impossible.