I Really Don't Understand The Left

In some part, yes. But for the most part, no. Government has actually SLOWED technological advancement over the last two decades because of their idiotic "green" push.
It's capitalists who have undermined the advancement of technology by keeping our nation addicted to fossil fuels. We have nuclear technology that can very easily provide us with much more energy than coal and petrol. Whenever capitalists take control of utility companies they hike prices and perform horribly compared to when the local municipality owns and runs the company. State-owned utility companies offer lower prices and offer much better performance and customer service.

When capitalists are in control of large, vital industries like energy, finance, and public transit, they do a dismissal job, hurting the country.
 
It's capitalists who have undermined the advancement of technology by keeping our nation addicted to fossil fuels. We have nuclear technology that can very easily provide us with much more energy than coal and petrol. Whenever capitalists take control of utility companies they hike prices and perform horribly compared to when the local municipality owns and runs the company. State-owned utility companies offer lower prices and offer much better performance and customer service.

When capitalists are in control of large, vital industries like energy, finance, and public transit, they do a dismissal job, hurting the country.


Proving you know nothing about science, either.
 
How so? Be specific.


Is coerced liking, really liking someone?

If you expressed dislike towards Hitler, or mussolini, their thugs would first beat you, then, if you remained uppity, they would kill you.

Less than 10% of the German and Italian populations were Party members. The rest, because they had been disarmed, were little removed from serfdom.

The only way you can get your fantasy land, is by disarming the population, so no, you don't want regular people to have guns.
 
What's the result of the above government involvement in the Russian economy? This:

Putin is a staunch Russian nationalist and patriot, hence the economy must serve the Russian people.

If you are going to put up economic data make sure it's in REAL terms.

That graph you posted is misleading cherrypicked bs by some "Nikolay" on Wikipedia.



In economic terms Russia is little more than a gas station with an attitude problem that is alienating it's customers. It's economy pretty much topped out in 2008, when energy prices peaked and it started invading it's neighbors again.

It has had almost no real economic growth since then due to it's agressive, imperialist foreign policy and corrupt, repressive domestic governing.

gdp-per-capita-worldbank.png




This is what you've chosen as a model of econoimc growth? :uhh:
 
Last edited:
@christill waiting for you to define fossil fuel using your own words.

and you called yourself cultsmasher. Took me a while to dredge up your former name from my memory banks.
 
If you are going to put up economic data make sure it's in REAL terms.

That graph you posted is misleading cherrypicked bs by some "Nikolay" on Wikipedia.



Russia is little more than a gas station with an attitude problem that realized potential around 2008, when energy prices peaked and it started invading it's neighbors again.

It has had almost no real economic growth since then due to it's agressive, imperialist foreign policy.

gdp-per-capita-worldbank.png

The aggressive imperialist is the United States, with its 700 military installations and bases around the world. The US has troops right now in Syria, occupying all of its oil fields and it's now supporting a Jewish supremacist apartheid state that is committing mass genocide in Gaza. The fact is that Russia got out of its economic depression after Putin nationalized all of the companies that I listed in that post. Russia's economy has since grown tremendously since then. It wasn't laissez-faire capitalism that saved Russia's economy, it was a mixed economy, with a considerable degree of government participation.

Poland and Lithuania also have plenty of government involvement in their economies, they're not Milton Freidman-run economies. They're not laissez-faire.

Poland​

  • Energy Sector: The Polish energy sector has significant state involvement. Notable state-owned companies include PGE Polska Grupa Energetyczna S.A., ENEA S.A., and ENERGA SA.
  • Finance Sector: The finance sector has both state-owned and private entities. Major banks like PKO Bank Polski are state-owned, but there are also many private banks and financial institutions operating in the country.

Lithuania​

  • Energy Sector: The Lithuanian energy sector also has state participation, with companies like Litgrid being state-owned.
  • Finance Sector: Similar to Poland, Lithuania's finance sector is a mix of state-owned and private entities. The sector includes both local banks and branches of international banks.
MIXED ECONOMIES = Milton Friedman isn't there. No Milton Friedman.
 
Last edited:
Is coerced liking, really liking someone?

If you expressed dislike towards Hitler, or mussolini, their thugs would first beat you, then, if you remained uppity, they would kill you.

Less than 10% of the German and Italian populations were Party members. The rest, because they had been disarmed, were little removed from serfdom.

The only way you can get your fantasy land, is by disarming the population, so no, you don't want regular people to have guns.

Why would the enemies of the country be permitted to arm themselves with combat rifles? Civilians were permitted to own combat rifles and ammunition, provided they were members of the party. However, that's them, not necessarily us. We're American nationalists, not German or Italian nationalists. We have our own culture, history, and practices and that must be factored into the equation when establishing an American nationalist, socialist government. I'm for the Second Amendment and all American citizens having access to combat rifles (i.e. "assault rifles"), handguns, and ammo. I'm not for gun control.
 
Last edited:
@christill waiting for you to define fossil fuel using your own words.

and you called yourself cultsmasher. Took me a while to dredge up your former name from my memory banks.
I never called myself "cult-smasher", so you're confusing me with someone else.
 
Define fossil fuel.
Oil, coal, and gas are generated by decomposing plants and animals. When you use these hydrocarbons or "fossil fuels" they emit carbon when you burn them, which ends up in our atmosphere. We now have advanced nuclear technology that is safe and can provide us with much more energy than fossil fuels. The only reason we're still using fossil fuels is because Big Oil wants to keep milking the cow $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. Their pursuit of profits takes precedence over what's best for the nation and humanity. They will undermine human progress, including the advancement of technology, to continue milking the fossil fuels $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. That's one of the ways capitalism undermines technological innovation and human progress.
 
Last edited:
Oil, coal, and gas are generated by decomposing plants and animals. When you use these hydrocarbons or "fossil fuels" they emit carbon when you burn them, which ends up in our atmosphere. We now have advanced nuclear technology that is safe and can provide us with much more energy than fossil fuels. The only reason we're still using fossil fuels is because Big Oil wants to keep milking the cow $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. Their pursuit of profits takes precedence over what's best for the nation and humanity. They will undermine human progress, including the advancement of technology, to continue milking the fossil fuels $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. That's one of the ways capitalism undermines technological innovation and human progress.


How do the outer planets have such enormous amounts of fossil fuels then?
 
How do the outer planets have such enormous amounts of fossil fuels then?
Fossil fuels, as the name implies, are derived from the remains of ancient plants and animals that lived millions of years ago on Earth. These remains, under high pressure and heat over geological timescales, transformed into coal, oil, and natural gas. This process requires biological material and specific Earth-like conditions, which is why fossil fuels are associated with planets that have hosted life.

Regarding the outer planets having "enormous amounts of fossil fuels," this is a misconception. These planets do have abundant hydrocarbons, like methane and ethane, but they are not fossil fuels in the traditional sense, as they were not formed from decomposed organic matter. Instead, they are the result of chemical processes in those planets' atmospheres or interiors, unrelated to biological processes. Therefore, while hydrocarbons exist elsewhere in the solar system, they are not "fossil fuels" as we understand them on Earth. They are not the result of decomposing plants or animals.
 
The aggressive imperialist is the United States

Russia can't be conducting agressive impealist foreign policy...because America is?

Do you not understand that logically BOTH can be true?


Aside from this basic logical failure there are also factual problems with your claim - United States is not annexing lands of other countries, Russia is. It's not expanding it's empire, Russia is.
 

Forum List

Back
Top