Jump to content
Forums upgraded! Read more... ×
cn-nadc.net | North Atlantic Defense Coalition

legend

Immortal Member
  • Content Count

    2,047
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

legend last won the day on December 24 2014

legend had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

13 Good

About legend

  • Rank
    Secretary General Emeritus
  • Birthday 12/31/1993

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Cybernations Info

  • Nation Link
    http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=335348
  • Nation Ruler
    Legend
  • Nation Name
    Legendria
  • Resource One
    Marble
  • Resource Two
    Sugar
  1. legend

    Capitalism Vs. Socialism

    You've got to be joking here. In an ideal world, yes, if it is practical, yes, we will move off oil if it becomes too expensive, but in the short term, no. There is no other alternative that is as easily used that can replace oil. Oil IS monopolized by OPEC, a cartel of oil producing countries. They pretty much decides how much to produce at what price. As to your local petrol stations, they are essentially an oligopoly operating in a kinked supply/demand curve. There's absolutely NO incentive for them to put their prices low, in fact, the government anti-competition/collusion laws are the only thing stopping them from banding together and deciding that the price of oil should be 10 dollars per gallon. As to why petrol prices are high, I refer you to this link: http://www.energytrendsinsider.com/2012/03/21/what-makes-up-the-cost-of-a-gallon-of-gasoline/ From that link, They are all in competition with each other for SKILLED workers. But for labourers who don't need to be highly skilled, there is an excess in supply, so the factories CAN band together and decide to pay them butt low wages...just look at how most MNCs have outsourced to China due to cheap labour costs. That's what you get in a country with no minimum wage laws and lax labour laws, leading to a widening gap between the rich and poor. And, no, wages are not set based on mutual consent if the alternative to a really low salary for a worker, is to starve to death. Either they work, or they don't get food and die. Being caught between a rock and a hard place is not exactly free choice. It depends on which industries you're looking at. If it's in an industry that produces luxury goods, then the incidence of tax normally fall more on the producer than the consumer as an increase in price would lead to a more than proportionate decrease in quantity demanded. Alright, let's just assume TARP didn't happen. It is widely agreed that if TARP did not pass, the economy would have been in further doldrums. Just look at the Great Depression of 1930s. Hoover did exactly what you said,and took the laissez faire approach. Guess where that ended him up in. If Bush/Obama did not initiate TARP, 2008 would be a repeat of the Great Depression.
  2. legend

    Capitalism Vs. Socialism

    This analogy only works if the good in question is not a necessity. If it was something like petrol, and we leave everything to a monopoly without government intervention, we would all be held ransom by the oil companies (not to say we aren't now...). What if all the factories band together and refuse to pay more than $1 an hour to sort bananas? If the government doesn't intervene, the people would be forced to work at $1/hour. If they don't, they starve. A choice between a rock and a hard place, is not a choice. What about market failures? For example, a factory may produce goods at a low cost, but at the same time pollutes the environment. Based on your theory, simply because they're selling it cheaply, consumers will flock to them. However, one needs to take into account the external costs to the environment, and this is where the government steps in with regulations, fines, taxes and etc to internalise the said externalities. Am I a proponent of communism/socialism? No, but to say that laissez faire is the answer to everything would be an oversimplification of the whole field of Economics. Keynesian economics is once again back in the vogue, and I believe that government intervention IS needed to maximise economic growth.
  3. legend

    First Thing

    bitch
  4. legend

    Stalin: Good or Bad?

    DW, "winning" Russia would have meant winning half a continent, traversing across Asia. I highly doubt that Hitler could have done that with UK and the USA biting his ass on the other side.
  5. legend

    legalizing of weed

    Thing is, a correlation does not necessarily show causal link. People who use drugs are not neccesarily screwed up. People who are screwed up tend to use drugs a way lot more.
  6. legend

    Stalin: Good or Bad?

    Stalin was lucky that Russia was big. Simple as that. Hitler should never had invaded Russia before conquering the rest of Europe and the UK. The war was lost when he opened up the Russian front. No one has invaded and subdued Russia successfully. Hitler, Napoleon, all great military commanders, and all failed. Its just too big and cold.
  7. legend

    International sporting events

    See thing is, why don't they just allow doping. I mean if people want to take the risk of dying to win eternal glory, why not? Let them poison themselves if they want to. As to fairness and all that crap, who cares. I mean Nature clearly didn't intend for us to be fair to each other...Darwinism anyone?
  8. legend

    1 Dead at Sepratist Victory Party in Quebec Election

    Lol, its Canada, nothing happens there. On a more serious note, this is quite shocking. Even for Canadians...
  9. Well, the thing was, everyone presumed that Roberts would vote with the rest of the conservative wing, and Kennedy would end up being the swing vote. However, during the oral submissions, Kennedy was fairly skeptical and lots of pundits believed that he will vote alongside his conservative brethren and strike down the law. Then this happened. Kennedy DID vote alongside his conservative peers, but Roberts distinguished himself by voting with the liberals and upholding the law.
  10. I had a feeling Roberts sided with the Liberals to prevent his Court from being pigeonholed into one of the most conservative Courts in modern history. His ruling/line of logic does make sense but I'm surprised at how little the government argued on the "tax" point that ultimately pushed Roberts to side with the libs.
  11. legend

    Once upon a time....

    And he fell into it and died.
  12. legend

    Once upon a time....

    He bends over in an attempt to investigate the source of the noise. Unfortunately he fell over and died.
  13. legend

    Nuke Sub Fire in Maine

    Its precisely people like you, Scotia, who would go all ZOMG! THE WORLD IS GONNA END! This is a small incident, and its clearly under control. So don't get your knots all twisted over nothing. I'm quite sure if there's any remote chance of it exploding into a nuclear armageddon, this would have received way more coverage than it is getting.
  14. legend

    First Nations Rights

    Well, again thats part of natural selection.
  15. legend

    First Nations Rights

    Coming from a country with rampant racial inequalities, I would say that affirmative actions need to be stopped. We don't want a culture cultivating a crutch mentality amongst indigenous people. A quota system, priority treatment and etc stifles meritocracy, and through that hampers a country's growth. Natural selection allows the strong to survive and the weak to perish, as harsh as it sounds, the indigenous people need to work just as hard as everyone else to earn their keep.
×