re: What is your personal definition of "globalism" ?

You FAILED to answer which CONUS President. Move back 12 spaces on the board, do not pass go, do not collect a hundred dollars. You are in jail.

You also fail at denying AND DEFINING the power structure of the WEF.

Define the WEF.

Define power structure.

Define the great reset

Define build back better

Define Klaus Schwabs' role at the WEF.

Stay on topic do not deviate or be white knighted by cheese dick.

quote:

---

I can't speak for the racial component of that, but the economic part has been proven true.

---

quote:

---

We've seen that countries will adapt and the market reigns.

No resource is more important than petro and look at all the advances we've done in the past 10 years alone.

---

Yeah this is more projection on my part, but I don't think petro is a great example to use because one or two countries can't dictate the supply to the rest. They can make it more expensive, but a lot of countries have oil.

quote:

---

We're doing a lot better than Poland

Diverse EU countries are doing a lot better than Poland

I don't think that's the example you should use

---

More longer term projection on my part and I should have been more clear about that. We haven't seen the long term impacts of the broader EU immigration policy. Thats a generational thing. Its not really "what does this look like in 5 years" point more than it is a "what does this look like in 25 years" one.

quote:

---

That's because they're already way more left than we are

---

It really doesn't matter to me which side of the pendulum they are on. The point was that because they are more homogenous they will be more consistent in the policy they implement, and long term it will be more successful because of that consistency.

You can't have these wild swings back and forth every 4 years where the new administration spends a year tearing up stuff the previous admin did, one year actually doing a few things, then 2 years unable to act because they lost congress.

So Poland can, and in my previous post I laid out that they actively are, poor on a lot of policy outside of the immigration stuff. But slightly worse (but still at least theoretically effective) policy that your society will actively work together toward is better than 4 years of an ideal policy and then 4 years of the complete opposite, with some 8 year stretches sprinkled in there. And that pendulum cycle is only going to get more drastic the less homogenous western societies become.

quote:

---

but I don't think petro is a great example to use because one or two countries can't dictate the supply to the rest.

---

I don't know any resources where 1 or 2 countries can dictate the supply to the rest.

Take chips. While Taiwan is the best, we've seen in the past 5 years that's not exclusive. It's just in our current system it's been more efficient to let Taiwan be the best. Covid was a lesson and markets adapted.

[embed]Elite network globalism
The belief that wealthy executives, officials, financiers, and organizations pursue common interests across borders, often at ordinary citizens’ expense. This can mean a critique of observable influence and lobbying—or an unsupported leap to a single coordinated command structure.[/embed]

This is the closest to what my mind's eye sees when I think about the term globalism.

quote:

---

I don't know any resources where 1 or 2 countries can dictate the supply to the rest.

Take chips. While Taiwan is the best, we've seen in the past 5 years that's not exclusive. It's just in our current system it's been more efficient to let Taiwan be the best. Covid was a lesson and markets adapted.

---

At this point we just need more chips. We've seen adaptation to the quantity portion of demand (and even that is still not settled, the big chipmakers have years of demand backlog now) but we will get to a point where it is more about quality, or a specific type of chip.

And really it doesn't even have to be chips. The flavor of the day is AI but down the road it'll be something else. If China or whoever else gets to the economic table first with the next widget, they can absolutely hold back supply from those who don't do what China (or whoever else) wants them to.

But its a tough situation because I fully acknowledge that you can't have every country produce everything it needs on its own. Hell, we can't even get key infrastructure built at all in the US. We could stand up plants producing Widget X tomorrow and we might not have people to actually work in them.

quote:

---

But its a tough situation because I fully acknowledge that you can't have every country produce everything it needs on its own. Hell, we can't even get key infrastructure built at all in the US. We could stand up plants producing Widget X tomorrow and we might not have people to actually work in them.

---

Therein lies the rub

This is why nationalistic economics are inherently anti-market and redistributive (leftist). The efficiencies of the market cannot be realized and are the problem in many ways.

quote:

---

What is your personal definition of "globalism" ?

---

Square pegs. Lots of big ones.

Round hole. One tiny one.

quote:

---

82 dv i really wish this clown would just go away lol

---

Greasy Fork is your friend.

quote:

---

AWS was one of the first major players. Why do you want to punish them for being smart and making good decisions?

---

I think they should be their own company that either succeeds or fails on their own merits. When you have these huge conglomerates one side can prop the other side up and allow that part of the business to operate at a loss, undercutting competitors until competition is erased. If AWS is successful it should be so under its own ticker, with its own board, own financials, etc.

quote:

---

I get it, but these are inherently leftist policies.

With the increased use of catastrophe syndrome (you aren't, I'm speaking generally), it's weird that same slippery slope argument isn't used with leftist economics.

---

I have some leftwing ideas that I support. I want to do things that work. I also support either going fully public OR fully private with health insurance. The middleground system we have only gives us the worst of both outcomes. I prefer a Swiss model personally but I think we need to choose a lane either way we go with it.