Liberal Forum

Polar1ty » 31 Dec 2021, 2:04 am » wrote: ↑

31 Dec 2021, 2:04 am

There used to be a joke in left socialist circles about how there's hardly any diff. between the two

The difference is Trotsky. 

Okay. Well mind you this specific geographic region and its history isn't my strongest area of understanding. I know a bit and I'm well versed in geopolitics and what was going on in a global sense throughout this period of time. So bear with me, and since you kind of gave a general focus lets examine just a little piece from the beginning.

1st- On what basis do you believe that ANYONE who played a role in the United Fruit Company "controls or ever controlled our economy"? Off-hand this is just not plausible. The importance of banana's as a share of our economy was almost imperceptible throughout the period detailed. It has never been a vital commodity in the US. It was vital to the United Fruit company and to these Latin American countries at times but never even a good investment in the US (i.e. highly profitable). Note this is pre-Keynesian so we have sketchy data on the vitals (i.e. company financial data).

Originally involvement was predicated by what? You had many nascent Central American nations constantly under threat attempting to establish various forms of government. This was a tropical and almost completely undeveloped region in an economic sense. Extremely difficult terrain with ZERO infrastructure. 3rd world even by 1870's standards. It was sparsely populated by Latin and indigenous Indians. literacy estimates indicate there was a 0% literacy rate in 1870's (meaning so low it isn't measured). Even today Guatemala has the lowest literacy rate in the world at less than 30%. They also have some of the worst infrastructure in the world. None in the early stages of UF involvement. So you have to be able to envision what the situation was.

LibDave » 31 Dec 2021, 2:21 am » wrote: ↑

31 Dec 2021, 2:21 am

Okay. Well mind you this specific geographic region and its history isn't my strongest area of understanding. I know a bit and I'm well versed in geopolitics and what was going on in a global sense throughout this period of time. So bear with me, and since you kind of gave a general focus lets examine just a little piece from the beginning.

1st- On what basis do you believe that ANYONE who played a role in the United Fruit Company "controls or ever controlled our economy"? Off-hand this is just not plausible. The importance of banana's as a share of our economy was almost imperceptible throughout the period detailed. It has never been a vital commodity in the US. It was vital to the United Fruit company and to these Latin American countries at times but never even a good investment in the US (i.e. highly profitable). Note this is pre-Keynesian so we have sketchy data on the vitals (i.e. company financial data).

Originally involvement was predicated by what? You had many nascent Central American nations constantly under threat attempting to establish various forms of government. This was a tropical and almost completely undeveloped region in an economic sense. Extremely difficult terrain with ZERO infrastructure. 3rd world even by 1870's standards. It was sparsely populated by Latin and indigenous Indians. literacy estimates indicate there was a 0% literacy rate in 1870's (meaning so low it isn't measured). Even today Guatemala has the lowest literacy rate in the world at less than 30%. They also have some of the worst infrastructure in the world. None in the early stages of UF involvement. So you have to be able to envision what the situation was.

This is a lot of strawmen..I'm trying to tell you how our economy really works. I don't actually give a **** about the iq of people in Honduras. It isn't relevant. 

FOS » 30 Dec 2021, 10:52 pm » wrote: ↑

30 Dec 2021, 10:52 pm

Forget the Amazon conspiracy. Let's move to something else. Just read this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Fruit_Company

tell me if this fits in with your meritocracy entrepeur idea of how the is economy works? Lol.

I always love the patronizing, obligatory wiki link. It makes me giggle hysterically

Initially what became UF's purpose was to fulfill a contract with this nascent nation to build a railroad. Simple enough nothing evil there. Actually probably a very beneficial project for the people in the region. An American company comes in with superior technology and helps them build a railroad through their country. I'm sure the government at the time was hoping they could become wealthy trading with the US and other countries in the area. The railroad was obviously a bold plan in this environment. But I'm sure they just did it for the right price. Nothing untoward.

LibDave » 31 Dec 2021, 2:27 am » wrote: ↑

31 Dec 2021, 2:27 am

Initially what became UF's purpose was to fulfill a contract with this nascent nation to build a railroad. Simple enough nothing evil there. Actually probably a very beneficial project for the people in the region. An American company comes in with superior technology and helps them build a railroad through their country. I'm sure the government at the time was hoping they could become wealthy trading with the US and other countries in the area. The railroad was obviously a bold plan in this environment. But I'm sure they just did it for the right price. Nothing untoward.

Creative destruction. 

Come on dude. This is very naive. Read about 4he boxer rebellion in china...
 

FOS » 31 Dec 2021, 2:25 am » wrote: ↑

31 Dec 2021, 2:25 am

This is a lot of strawmen..I'm trying to tell you how our economy really works. I don't actually give a **** about the iq of people in Honduras. It isn't relevant.

Let me finish.  You asked me to read it as proof of your assessment of the evils of our nations past and present and the evils of our economic endeavors.

Well you asked and so I graciously accepted.  Please allow a full analysis before you start changing subject to the Boxer Rebellion in China.  And it is quite frankly a lot of history to sort through.

LibDave » 30 Dec 2021, 10:53 pm » wrote: ↑

30 Dec 2021, 10:53 pm

The example I gave earlier was of a study done. They took 500 Obama supporters and 500 Trump supporters and gave them the inaugural and state of the union speeches of both Trump and Obama and were told they would be asked questions about the speech afterwards. Only they switched the names of the candidates in bold letters at the top of the pages.

Out of 500 Obama supporters something like 475 when given multiple choice questions as to which policies they supported chose the policies of the opposite candidate. And they also provided reasons why. Almost the same results from the Trump supporters. So what does this say about the way humans make decisions? And what is it about yourself that makes you PRESUME you aren't in that 95% group? Or me for that matter. I was, I know that for sure.

I don't know who you normally "debate" on net forums...maybe some < 125 IQ trash who parrot Democrat/Republican talking points.

Regardless, the person you're talking to is far above 125 and he is definitely not in the 95%.

In the vast majority of cases you using that "study" would appropriately describe your opponent, but you basically did the equivalent of bragging about your college team level basketball skills in front of a guy who's playing on a 3rd tier NBA team. You could consider yourself simply to be very unlucky for running into the wrong guy @ the wrong time or blessed since you have a chance to prove yourself.

I would attempt to address that point he made about how the economy actually works vs some theory taught in grad school econ class that never works except in some textbook/econometric model developed by PhDs who end up being flunkies anyway in the real world (e.g. LTCM).
 
 
 

LibDave » 31 Dec 2021, 2:31 am » wrote: ↑

31 Dec 2021, 2:31 am

Let me finish.  You asked me to read it as proof of your assessment of the evils of our nations past and present and the evils of our economic endeavors.

Don't say nation. This is a country, not a nation. A nation is a people. 

LibDave » 31 Dec 2021, 2:31 am » wrote: ↑

31 Dec 2021, 2:31 am

Let me finish.  You asked me to read it as proof of your assessment of the evils of our nations past and present and the evils of our economic endeavors.

Well you asked and so I graciously accepted.  Please allow a full analysis before you start changing subject to the Boxer Rebellion in China.  And it is quite frankly a lot of history to sort through.

Truth can be hard I guess. But I've done a lot of prerequisite education that you apparently have not done. Allow the jury to note this fact. Yawn.
 

The point wasn't that YOU are illiterate. It is important to understand what the situation was. History is meaningless without context. Nation... Country is beside the point.

So do you agree with the basic facts about the initial interest of what became UF and the then leaders at the time. They wanted to develop and become prosperous and their leadership convinced a moderately wealthy American to bring equipment down there and build a railroad for a price. So nothing evil there.

Agreed?

LibDave » 31 Dec 2021, 2:41 am » wrote: ↑

31 Dec 2021, 2:41 am

The point wasn't that YOU are illiterate. It is important to understand what the situation was. History is meaningless without context. Nation... Country is beside the point.

So do you agree with the basic facts about the initial interest of what became UF and the then leaders at the time. They wanted to develop and become prosperous and their leadership convinced a moderately wealthy American to bring equipment down there and build a railroad for a price. So nothing evil there.

Agreed?

Nation vs country is not besides the point. Fools often cannot articulate ideas that there is no language for. 

This nonsense about UF is also quite a red herring. No I don't agree. The goal Was always power...not profit.
 

That's due to your confirmation bias. You read a brief overview of the history of an entire group of nations and in 5000 words convinced yourself of exactly what you wanted to convince yourself of without ever examining the facts. I'm just going through trying to figure out if your bias is accidentally correct. It might be.

At the time foreign interests (European and US mainly) had an interest in developing the region. This was due to geopolitical reasons. The region is at the waist of the continent and even though narrow the obstacle was insurmountable without infrastructure. Heavily forested, hot, and tropical diseases were rampant. Foreigners had no natural immunity's. So this was a daunting endeavor. Not for the faint of heart. But there was a great value to developing the region if someone could overcome the obstacles. The US was best suited for this as we had experience developing large tracks of land to the north. But this was a different beast in many ways. Our experience indicated railroads were the first order of business.

If successful this would shorten trading routes having to go around South America.

LibDave » 31 Dec 2021, 2:59 am » wrote: ↑

31 Dec 2021, 2:59 am

At the time foreign interests (European and US mainly) had an interest in developing the region. This was due to geopolitical reasons. The region is at the waist of the continent and even though narrow the obstacle was insurmountable without infrastructure. Heavily forested, hot, and tropical diseases were rampant. Foreigners had no natural immunity's. So this was a daunting endeavor. Not for the faint of heart. But there was a great value to developing the region if someone could overcome the obstacles. The US was best suited for this as we had experience developing large tracks of land to the north. But this was a different beast in many ways. Our experience indicated railroads were the first order of business.

If successful this would shorten trading routes having to go around South America.

If you lol...want to discuss geopolitics in 1830 then whatever. I could add many more things to that.

But in the modern era let me add this.. the Himalayas are a lot bigger than the rocky mountains. But China wants a road going through afghanistan.. doesn't it?

Can you explain that? I can. 
 

I haven't been able to locate data on the amounts and much was delineated to the region. But essentially the US, and European nations were propping up these nascent countries with capital in the hopes they could become developed and self-sufficient. At the time the US was NOT in the best position to afford these giveaways close on the heals of our own civil war.

Due to disease and unfamiliarity with the area UF hired nationals to do much of the manual labor and brought in US workers to handle the technical aspects. I'm sure this was a real bitch of an assignment. Amazing to take on such a task.

The money provided to the leadership must have been embezzled or who knows what? I don't find any other explanation such as neighboring incursions from other countries or weather catastrophe's. But I'll find it. Anyway, for whatever reason when they were about 70% completed with the railroad when the currency collapsed. 70% is my best guess due to the funds needed to complete it compared to the original agreement. The government was unable to pay off the contract and further construction halted. Basically at that point UF had lost its *** and was bankrupt due to the failure of the country to pay as promised.

LibDave » 31 Dec 2021, 3:11 am » wrote: ↑

31 Dec 2021, 3:11 am

I haven't been able to locate data on the amounts and much was delineated to the region. But essentially the US, and European nations were propping up these nascent countries with capital in the hopes they could become developed and self-sufficient. At the time the US was NOT in the best position to afford these giveaways close on the heals of our own civil war.

Due to disease and unfamiliarity with the area UF hired nationals to do much of the manual labor and brought in US workers to handle the technical aspects. I'm sure this was a real bitch of an assignment. Amazing to take on such a task.

The money provided to the leadership must have been embezzled or who knows what? I don't find any other explanation such as neighboring incursions from other countries or weather catastrophe's. But I'll find it. Anyway, for whatever reason when they were about 70% completed with the railroad when the currency collapsed. 70% is my best guess due to the funds needed to complete it compared to the original agreement. The government was unable to pay off the contract and further construction halted. Basically at that point UF had lost its *** and was bankrupt due to the failure of the country to pay as promised.

You don't need to locate data..what is clear already is that power controls the economy.
 

LibDave » 29 Dec 2021, 5:25 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Dec 2021, 5:25 pm

Using Michael Jordan as an example:
Michael used his effort to hone his skills to a truly phenomenal level. As was his inalienable right to do so.

MJ <--> Owner of the Bulls
MJ and the owner of the Bulls entered into a private contract in which the owner agreed to pay him $26M/year to play for the Bulls without government interference. Both parties thought they would benefit from the exchange of labor (and they were right).

Owner <--> Fans
The owner risked this money paid to MJ with the prospect of increased revenue. He did this partly due to the prospect of increased ticket sales and cost of admission to the Bulls games. The fans willingly and freely agreed the cost of admission was well worth the exchange of their wealth to watch the spectacle. No one was forced to buy tickets so obviously all involved were happy with the exchange.

You're basically pulling a Ben Shapiro where you set up strawmen...or maybe they aren't strawmen, but rather arguments made by retarded, low/avg IQ trash who have no idea what they are talking about, and then saying you earned victory since your argument is more logical or sound than theirs.

When most people criticize "capitalism," they are not reprimanding high earning stars like Britney Spears, Jay Zs, Michael Jordans, Oprahs, etc. of the world. Nobody gives a **** about how much Lebron James makes in a year.

What they are criticizing is the monopoly power of various corporations who use government to further rent seeking abilities as well as corruption that undermines the dearly held assumption of meritocracy you claim exists.

This corruption is rampant in the world of finance...if you claim you are such an "expert" you should be no stranger to the **** that's going on behind closed doors (insider trading deals that 99.99% of people don't have access to, how "money" comes into existence as debt, how the large banks front run Treasury bonds and sell them to the secondary market @ a premium while providing nothing of added value, how corporations like BlackRock and Vanguard buy up properties using massive leverage your typical middle class family will never see even a small % of, the list goes on and on).
 
By the way, your kind is actually seen frequently on Unz.com (a site that supports a diverse set of views - libertarian, fascist, tradcuck conservative, some social democrats) and basically every time I see a libertarian argue against a fascist/Nazi, the latter ends up winning. I don't think you're going to count yourself as among the exceptions.

Polar1ty » 31 Dec 2021, 3:23 am » wrote: ↑

31 Dec 2021, 3:23 am

You're basically pulling a Ben Shapiro where you set up strawmen...or maybe they aren't strawmen, but rather arguments made by retarded, low/avg IQ trash who have no idea what they are talking about, and then saying you earned victory since your argument is more logical or sound than theirs.

When most people criticize "capitalism," they are not reprimanding high earning stars like Britney Spears, Jay Zs, Michael Jordans, Oprahs, etc. of the world. Nobody gives a **** about how much Lebron James makes in a year.

What they are criticizing is the monopoly power of various corporations who use government to further rent seeking abilities as well as corruption that undermines the dearly held assumption of meritocracy you claim exists.

This corruption is rampant in the world of finance...if you claim you are such an "expert" you should be no stranger to the **** that's going on behind closed doors (insider trading deals that 99.99% of people don't have access to, how "money" comes into existence as debt, how the large banks front run Treasury bonds and sell them to the secondary market @ a premium while providing nothing of added value, how corporations like BlackRock and Vanguard buy up properties using massive leverage your typical middle class family will never see even a small % of, the list goes on and on).
 
By the way, your kind is actually seen frequently on Unz.com (a site that supports a diverse set of views - libertarian, fascist, tradcuck conservative, some social democrats) and basically every time I see a libertarian argue against a fascist/Nazi, the latter ends up winning. I don't think you're going to count yourself as among the exceptions.

lol I do not frequent unz but it is largely because unz is himself a jew. Maybe he is an outlier. Could very well be.

But I would say one of the reasons I am a fascist today is because they win their debates against everyone. Not just libertarians. 

LibDave » 31 Dec 2021, 2:31 am » wrote: ↑

31 Dec 2021, 2:31 am

Let me finish.  You asked me to read it as proof of your assessment of the evils of our nations past and present and the evils of our economic endeavors.

Well you asked and so I graciously accepted.  Please allow a full analysis before you start changing subject to the Boxer Rebellion in China.  And it is quite frankly a lot of history to sort through.

Anyway what makes you even think I give a **** about the 'evils' of my nation? Do you think I am a woman?