You lost me. Anyway I don't care about the settlers example. As I said it was a bad analogy and not important for the discussion.

Lost you on what?

actually, as someone who has only played twice I can understand where uly is going.

I am kinda busy right now, but can we please get this back on topic

On your settlers strategy points, or at least how it related to my point about needing to produce a range of commodities and products. My point was that free-traders always push towards a trading strategy, no matter what the "board" looks like. So even if the board enables a player to build on all 5 commodities with decent numbers, free-traders will still recommend building near a port and focusing on a couple of goods. Even though trading requires you to export extra goods in order to get the foreign exchange needed to import goods you need, so it's not cost effective (rolling a number and getting ore is much cheaper than selling three wheat and getting ore). The whole reason why many countries pursued autarky in the 1920s and 1930s and South American countries pursued Import-Substitution-industrialization in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s is because of the problem of not being able to export enough of their cash crops or pet commodities they specialized in, in order to buy imports. ISI led to rapid development of virtually all of South America (and Mexico). On the other hand, IMF countries imposed this kind of cash-crop/export economy strategy on a lot of poor developing countries which brought about terrible effects.

*IMF, not IMF countries.

Well, I'm not disputing that some countries would be better off with protectionist approach to international trade. Although it seems to me that you somehow imply that free trade is always inferior, something I don't agree with either. However, it might be only my personal feeling.

No, free trade is not always inferior. It's inferior for large countries. Small countries have no choice but to support greater trade.

So we're not disagreeing, that's what I had thought and why I became confused with the debate over settlers.

Free Trade is always superior, as it encourages more corporations to use said trade routes granting better results for the citizens of the country. Tarrifs is exactly like any other tax...

And the mechanism through which these better results are always achieved works how?

Citizens are not shareholders so the offshoring of their jobs to a country which applies strict policy against repatriation of capital means any benefit from the profit said corporation earns in the foreign country might reach them only very indirectly, with great time lag and in very small volume. Something along the line that increased production in the foreign country will lead to higher GDP, which consequently means higher demand for imports including imports from your country. If the foreign country protects its markets, instead of imports you have to supply it from within, which again benefits only the corporation, not citizens residing in the country where its HQ is located. Once the subsidiaries in the foreign market start to supply world market, the profits might start moving home but the increased supply will lead to lower prices, which in turn negatively affects the profits made by exporting the goods still manufactured at home.

It's not so much about tarrifs, free movement of capital flows or technology are also very important.

":And the mechanism through which these better results are always achieved works how?"
More corporations=more competition=lower prices=happier citizens

"It's not so much about tarrifs, free movement of capital flows or technology are also very important."
Agree

I don't know what on earth Obi had in mind with this 'discussion'. We say who influences us, and?

I apologize, Putin, Fasces, all.

Long day, and now a BAD day, at the end, so I'm afraid I'm going to have to save the discussion--or at least my part of it, my questions and points and all, everyone else can of course keep going--for another time.

Nothing like a death in the family or anything, but something that I can't get off my mind, can be potentially harmful in a rather large way, and quite frankly, I am so seething at the moment, I, for once, REALLY don't feel like having a civil conversation on philosophy, and especially about points of logic.

The world's unfair, I realize that, I don't pretend otherwise.

'But I'd always hoped it was more logical, but beyond THAT...

I'd always thought that at least, when a man injures another, knowingly or not, maliciously or not, whether that man and that i jury be innocent or guilty or deserved or undeserved...

That he'd CARE--and the fact that someone can put me through this, someone I'll, in all likelihood, never see again, but CONSTANTLY have to think about, that this person will never even THINK of me again, or care about what he's done, and done over an incident so small as to involve a question over a printer...



God may have cast Satan out, but the fact God didn't afterwards even CARE Satan suffered, that for him the matter was closed, while Satan had to deal with it forevermore, and always think of God, with God never needing to give Satan a second thought...

One may make a heaven of hell, and a hell of heaven, certainly--but at least they generally CARE or at least KNOW.

Who is this person? I want to send him MONEY!!!!!!!!

Awww see mapleleaf cares. Obi you must tell us more about this grevious incident. Every detail please.

Including historical context, of course.

"God may have cast Satan out, but the fact God didn't afterwards even CARE Satan suffered, that for him the matter was closed, while Satan had to deal with it forevermore, and always think of God, with God never needing to give Satan a second thought...

One may make a heaven of hell, and a hell of heaven, certainly--but at least they generally CARE or at least KNOW."
And that is the reason I think Satan is good and God is evil.

Think about it, the only evil act Satan is famous for committing is rebelling against God, but wouldn't that mean that if God is evil, then we should be thanking Satan for rebelling?

Think about it, in the Bible, Satan kills 2 people, but God kills millions with his Earthquakes, the Flood etc.

How can we say God is good after everything he is done?

So what happened to Obi?

He is in exile on Tattooine. May the Fourth be with him. :-)

We still haven't heard who inspires Fasces. Robert Heinlein? Mussolini? Franco?

Myself?

Out of the three you listed I like Franco the best, however I don't really have any leader that I agree with and every issue.

So to answer your question, I don't know...

on* not and

What led you to the political beliefs you have? A book, an experience, your parents, what?

An anime... (guess which)

Full Metal Alchemist?

I don't have a clue about anime. I find it strange and disturbing. It's odd that a cartoon would inspire your worldview, but different strokes I guess.

abgemacht got it. It was FMA, which story was based in a very corrupt fascist dictatorship that got me interested in fascism. Because of that, I started researching fascism to see the pros and cons of it. And eventually it just caught on.

Like a mental illness?

how is loving fascism a mental illness?