Quote from: J ArcaneOoooh.  Borrowing a little bit from the GW playbook eh?  News flash bucko:  6 million jobs is a useless fucking number when you're not taking into account the quality and pay level of those jobs.  

You know where that job growth is coming from?  Service jobs.  Shitty minimum wage jobs like stocking shelves at Wal-Mart, or taking orders at McDonalds.  Meanwhile all the indistry jobs that were once the bread and butter of the middle and lower classes are being shipped overseas.  Now we're even seeing white collar jobs like IT and call center work being outsourced to India and Bangladesh.

And as for your claim about the national debt, well, I don't even know where the fuck you got that.  The national debt has been rising daily for the last year.  And expect it to keep rising, considering they just raised the debt cieling back in March.

I'll take your first as it's the shorter response (I hope).

Now it's not how many jobs (though that was the statistic quoted) it's the kinds of jobs.  Well, coming from a person who was un/under employed for the past four years, I'll take the job that pays me 75% of my top.  I'll restart and work my way up.  Though I'm a "professional," I applied at all kinds of places..service jobs at Lowes or Target...hell...even Starbucks. So take your holier than thou these jobs suck and shove it...snob.

And read what I wrote, dumb-fuck.  I didn't say Debt. I said Deficit.  They are two different things. They raise the debt ceiling every couple of years, so that's not really news now, is it.  Oh wait, it's a Republican (which, btw, it may surprise you to know I am not) in office, so now raising the debt ceiling is bad....

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalI know that in America you guys take insults to your country personally, but by and large in the UK we just don't give a fuck.  So you can talk about the hideous history of colonial British oppression all you want and I'll most likely agree with you before asking you why you've changed the subject and pointing out that we were actually talking about America.

Sorry it took so long to get back to this point...

See, it's not about attacks to our country per se. It's attacks against Americans, over and over and over again that gets tiresome.   I don't care how blase you are, howlittle you give a fuck about attacks against the UK, if you go into a non-international politics website and see nothing about how the UK is full of Faggot Tea Drinkers every fucking time, you'll get sick and tired of it.

When you couple that with typical armchair hypocrital comments about 'you shouldn't fight that war, you should fight this war'... or something tea related, you will get tired of it even faster. Don't tell me to go to Darfur, don't fucking tell me we need to take up arms against North Korea, or even fucking imply it, unless you are signing up to go yourself. In fact, if you want to critisize the war in the middle east (pick one or the other) as 'international bullying' then you have even less a leg to stand on with me. I don't take that shit from people here, why the FUCK would I take it from someone from another country?

Now for JimBob...

Quote from: JimBobOzSince old Skach has ignored 9/10th of what I wrote, it seems pointless to respond to him. In essence, for other readers, I would emphasise:

Hehehe...I like this trick.  I'll claim he didn't respond, then I can get away with claiming the same thing I just did, and I'll look like the magnanimous one. I like it...I really, really do.

To be honest, as I said, I didn't want to get into an economic debate late last night (for me).  I'm not so sure I want ot get in one now while I'm supposed to be working. but I'll see if I can ignore 9/10th...oh wait,I mean respond.

Quote from: JimBobOz

• Growth doesn't mean much to most people, if they're not going some of it.
• Most people in the USA are not getting some of the growth.

Growth is always good for everyone, whether they are direct or indirect beneficiaries. Some people are getting more than others – that's just the way the world works - unless, of course, you believe in the the forced redistribution of property to account for the discrepancy. As I specifically noted in my ignoring 9/10ths of your post, there were roughly 6M jobs created in the last 3 years. Those didn't come from nowhere; they came from growth in the economy. I don't have the figures handy, but the economy, on a yearly basis, has been growing wonderfully, and kicking off all sorts of benefits.

Quote from: JimBobOz

• This growth of the USA is based not on actual productivity, but on financial jiggery-pokery, and unsustainable debt.

One of the great things about the US economy is that productivity has risen tremendously over the past several years. So I disagree with your summary execution of growth as nothing more than "financial jiggery." In fact, by one estimate I read, productivity for the period between 2001 and 2004, productivity growth averaged around 3.8%.  this is a truly amazing figure. to put it in perspective, between the first quarter of 1969 and 2002 there was no eight-year period in which productivity growth exceeded 3.0 percent.  That's not to say we don't have too much debt; but it's not only reason for growth, and probably not a significant one (my assertion based on these productivity numbers, I don't have a specific number of the % of GDP based on what you term "financial-jiggery").

Quote from: JimBobOz

• Because it's based on debt, it's very fragile and unstable; and while the mass of people aren't getting the growth, they'll sure as hell get the drop if the debt bubble bursts.
• This growth, such as it is, can occur only because of exploitative trade and economic relations between the West and the developing world.
• And that's why the developing world doesn't like the West much.

These points are moot as the premise is wrong.  They assume your opinion that the US economic increases are due only to debt, which I dispute based primarily on productivity numbers that seem to show there's something else to our growth.

Quote from: JimBobOz

• The USA is the leader of the Western world, and is the loudest representative of it, so it gets the bulk of the hatred of the developing world. The EU, Japan and to a lesser extent China are just as responsible for the developing world's misery, and the developing world is most responsible itself; but the USA is the most prominent member, so it gets most of the anger, and anyway who wants to blame themselves for their troubles? Not the USA or EU, certainly not (say) Zimbabwe.

On this I think we can agree, to a greater or lesser extent.

Quote from: JimBobOzAnd that's one of the many reasons the world hates the USA. That, and the random invasions of countries recently. That always makes people angry. Plus, nobody likes a puffed-up, boastful, self-righteous person - and the USA's got that in spades.

There was nothing random about it. And Americans don't like whiny, spinless, why-can't-you-do-want-I-want petulance (from which, btw, I've excluded Australia, among others).  Perhaps we can just agree to dislike each other.

Quote from: JimBobOzThat Skach didn't read it is no great surprise. People tend not to read online, they scan. With the scan, they pick up a few key words, and fill in the blanks with their own prejudices, the wreckage of previous similar conversations, etc. It's one reason pdfs will never replace books - and I say that as a guy who made a respectable amount of money from selling rpg pdfs.

First, I can't explain it.  No matter where I go, I'm known by my last name.  Within weeks of starting this job, though I'd been a consultant here for a year before they hired me, I suddenly went from "Jim" to "Skach."  Oddest thing.

I have nothing against you, JimBob. If I'm not mistaken, I was relatively polite in my response. In fact I agreed with you on a number of points – such as US subsidies to farmers = bad (even if we disagree on the reason they are bad), or that Australia should get back the Gitmo prisoner.

Having said all that – fuck you.  I did read that article.  There were several reasons I didn't quote some of the economic data:

• The information was not pertinent to rebut the specific charge of disproportionate use of resources.
• The information was out-of-date. The article was from September of 2003. While the article contained the most recent I could find that showed the American percentage of world growth, the specifics about the American economy have been updated in the interim.
• It was a statistic used in an article that seemed, to me, to be an opinion piece. It seemed to draw conclusions and those conclusions were based on out-of-date information. They, therefore, didn't seem pertinent.

If you have more recent information about America's percentage of the overall growth of, say, that last 5 years, I'd be happy to see it.  I just couldn't find any on-the-spot.

So take your opinion of how I actually did what I did, and shove that with all the rest.  How the fuck would you know what I did? Instead of assuming there might be legitimate reasons I didn't quote other parts of the article, you assume I cherry-picked for some nefarious purpose and then filled in with...what was it again...oh yes... "the wreckage of previous similar conversations." What would cause you to assume that instead of asking - perhaps your own prejudice? Oh wait, that can't be, you're better than me. I'm sorry, I forgot.

I see some funky assumptions about economics from some folks.  Now, I'm hardly the Subject Matter Expert, but I have taken a few courses on the subject.

Growth is good for everyone. The STOCK MARKET is not Investment, in economic terms, and is NOT the GDP.  Growth in the Stock Market is not necessarily Growth in economic terms, though both can grow at the same time.  The Stock Market is the popularity contest of the economic world.

If the rich get richer, so fucking what? They worked for that money (most of them) and generally want to make even more money, which means they have to spend it on GROWTH.  If I am richer than my neighbor I might open a small business to make even more money, and as my business grows, I have to employ some dumb sumbitch to work the counter. Growth in action, a job was just created because I was 'rich'.  One miserly rich bastard does not change the basic dynamics, so please don't use the exceptions to prove the rule. Don't make me shake Bill Gates at you.

The GDP is not based on financial jiggery or debt.  It is P for Product for a reason, people.  The GDP has no ties to the governments budget.

Farmer subsidies are bad. All seem to agree. While I'm at it, Minimum wage is bad, so are garaunteed jobs for life.

None of which has a fucking thing to do with the OP, except tangentially. If you don't like how much of the world's product is going to the US, get your governement to stop exports to the US. Simple.  

I'll leave the economics to Skatch in the future, he seems to have a stronger hand on the till...

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalAh... that makes it alright then.  My apologies, let the torture continue.

Oh yes, because all of the crying about torture is true! And because I was responding to your assertion that they are not getting a fair trial by rebutting that fact, you bait-and-switch to torture.  Nice. A Master Baiter is I ever saw one (sorry, couldn't resist)

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalActually, for a lot of them that's EXACTLY what happened.  Most of the inmates of the Guantanamo camp weren't picked up by US soldiers but by Pakistani or Northern Alliance types.  Many of the people picked up were picked up on the assumption that they were spies because they had foreign passports.  In the case of a UK detainee, he was kept in Guantanamo for a couple of years because someone else, under torture, claimed he had seen him with Osama bin Laden.  Only problem was that at that point the guy was in the UK, working in a shop in his local highstreet.

First, you assert it was "under torture" that someone else named him.  Yeah, I know. In fact, in America, you can buy a tour to go down and get your torture-groove on. It's been so long since we've really had a good outlet for torture. Your detainee is in the UK now, yes? So it took a couple of years to determine who was telling the truth.  That's amazing; what with all the torture we can use and stuff. And don't even try that "torture doesn't work" bullshit - don't fly with me. Man, we were able to pick him up on highstreet and take him to gitmo?  We are good, aren't' we.

QuoteActually no... not in my opinion.  In fact and in international law.  Even if I accept that loads and loads of people believed he had WMD's 1) most of those people would also have agreed that the UN should have been left time to settle the matter and 2) If you're looking to legitimise the US' s foreign policy then you really don't want to start appealing to what lots of people think.

Actually, according to International Law, we were still officially at war with Iraq.  According to International Law, this was nothing more than a resumption of hostilities that had started with the liberation of Kuwait.
1) Th UN had allowed this to fester so long it would never have an answer. This is not even taking into account the oil-for-food scandal that had completely corrupted the UN's ability to act - too mnay conflicts of interest. the onyl way to know, to really know was to go in.  I once had a disucssion with a friend who was againt the war (before it started).  The only solution we could agree on was "under the UN auspices, we'll send 50,000 NATO troops in, effectively shutting down the country, and allowing the inspectors free reign to get a final answer.  If, after that, he's given a clean bill, we're gone."  I would rather have him gone, but it was a fair exchange to get the knowledge about the current threat.  Only one problem - it was never going to happen. 2) I'm not, except that you're looking to de-legitimize it based on what others think - good luck with that.

QuoteNo hindsight here.  3 million people marched through the streets of London in opposition to the war, all the moderate press favoured giving the UN more time and you just tried to suggest that 85% of people in the UK supported the war.

They didn't support the war - great.  That's not what we were discussing.  We were talking about the hindsight of saying now that there were no WMD. That's not what those crowds were chanting.  I should be more specific.  I do not remember the charge being "There are no WMD." The charge was "Give Peace a Chance." Two different things.

QuoteI even remember being in the War Studies department in the run up to war and the concensus among the staff was that there were no WMD (and if there were it was going to be a couple of decade old mustard gas cannisters) and that the US were being foolish.

Fucking bully for you.  How come that's not what the world consensus was?  How come that's not what Britain said it's consensus was? What about Germany? France? Russia? Poland? Italy?

QuoteCurrent US opposition to the war can absolutely be chalked up to hindsight seeing as the government bilked you good but not in the rest of the world.

It is your belief that we were bamboozled.  I disagree.  At the very least this is one American who did not base my opinion on WMD, but on the threat. The only way in which I was fooled was into thinking these yahoos would go all out, once the decision was made.

QuoteI agree.  But America are not only morally bankrupt cowards but they're also morally bankrupt cowards who claim to be morally righteous and global leaders.

Wait, are we cowards or not? I mean, were willing to fight all over the world for this adveturism, but now we're cowards. If you want o claim we're morally bankrupt, we can have that discussion, but first make up your minds if we're cowards or not.

QuoteDon't recognise that you're a regional strong-man using force to further its own ends and greasing the wheels with the blood of thousands of innocents?

And our region is the world, baby. Don't like it, change it.  You fucking Europeans.  I swear this really sets it up for what it is.  You like to claim we're a regional power because you can't stand the fact that we're more than that, and you aren't.  You're like Milwaukee.

And we prefer just to take the oil to grease the wheels. Blood takes an extra step.

And that's the other thing that happens.  Everyone wants to put a 't' in the name

Ack! Don't give it to me.  I'm no international money expert. And I never brought up the Stock Market - did someone and I missed it?

One of the 'other guys' used it as an explanation for the 'inflated' GDP.... or somesuch.. these long ass posts are hard to memorize even when you DON"T scan them like the lazy american pika I am...

Scanner!

Ohhh...I should get that movie...that guys head exploding was so cool...back then, anyway...and it fits in with the Americans are torturers theme.

Anyway, the entire economics thing is a massive sideline, completely trivial to the main topic. I just get tired of hearing the same economic assumptions over and over again from supposedly smart, educated people. I mean, it took about two minutes for me to be disabused of most of those when I stepped into my first class.   Of course, that was four years and two 'wars' ago for me, so my memory of details has gotten a bit fuzzy... but I seem to recall electric shocks being applied each time we said something as stupidly false as the shit I saw posted here....

That's it. I'm putting you guys on speed-dial for these sorts of discussions.

Please don't..really...my blood pressure can't take it.

I'd probably get along great with JimBob if we never talked politics.  It's why I don't talk politics with any but my closest friends for this very reason.

I'd hate to lose JimBob as a resource to bounce gaming ideas off and vice versa simply because are from different political perspectives.

Quote from: James J SkachI'd hate to lose JimBob as a resource to bounce gaming ideas off and vice versa simply because are from different political perspectives.

Why the fuck would that happen? Mate, despite what these lonely losers online living in their parents' basement tell you, it's entirely possible to get along with someone and disagree with them on this or that thing.

What, you think everyone in my game group votes for the same political party, all like the same kinds of chicks, etc? Fuck that noise. We argue all the time. Liking or disliking someone has nothing to do with whether you agree with him. You like him because he's a good bloke, and dislike him because he's cocksmock. Simpe as that.

QuoteNow it's not how many jobs (though that was the statistic quoted) it's the kinds of jobs. Well, coming from a person who was un/under employed for the past four years, I'll take the job that pays me 75% of my top. I'll restart and work my way up. Though I'm a "professional," I applied at all kinds of places..service jobs at Lowes or Target...hell...even Starbucks. So take your holier than thou these jobs suck and shove it...snob.

Wait wait, this is too rich.  I'm a "snob" for wanting a job that can actually provide me a living wage?  I'm "holier than thou" because I'm frustrated to see every decent employer in my city either moving its jobs over seas, or going out of business because they can't compete with those who do?  

Get some fucking perspective.  Goddamn nationalists.

Quote from: J ArcaneI'm a "snob" for wanting a job that can actually provide me a living wage?

No, for looking at someone else's job that he's happy to have as not good enough. That makes you a snob.

Quote from: J ArcaneI'm "holier than thou" because I'm frustrated to see every decent employer in my city either moving its jobs over seas, or going out of business because they can't compete with those who do?

Yes, holier than thou because you know better than the people who own thos businesses what to do with their businesses. If you don't like what they are doing, use your own business for your social engineering.  

Quote from: J ArcaneGet some fucking perspective.  Goddamn nationalists.

Hey...Fuck You!  I've got perspective.  I've been out of work.  I've been happy to take those "shitty" jobs you look down on. So, yeah...Fuck You.

If I'm an American, and I think it's the best economic system in the world, that makes me a nationalist. If you're an American, and you think it's a shitty economic system, that makes you...what? Anti-American? See the flaw in that logic?

Quote from: JimBobOzWhy the fuck would that happen? Mate, despite what these lonely losers online living in their parents' basement tell you, it's entirely possible to get along with someone and disagree with them on this or that thing.

What, you think everyone in my game group votes for the same political party, all like the same kinds of chicks, etc? Fuck that noise. We argue all the time. Liking or disliking someone has nothing to do with whether you agree with him. You like him because he's a good bloke, and dislike him because he's cocksmock. Simpe as that.

JimBob, I don't know you from Adam.  The sum of our relationship has been a rather heated echange about politics.

Now I'm not assuming you are going to hold this against me. But I've seen people do it.  Forgive me for not knowing you well enough to know if this is will happen or not. I'm hopeful is doesn't, but it's never good to assume that you can tell someone "Fuck You" and have them not be mad at you. This medium only makes those kinds of hopeful assumptions harder.