Plus, there's that whole third world exploitation issue to consider, which will continue as long as capitalism still exists.

Yeah, I guess the global poverty rate just halved itself over the past 20 years.

Large-idea policy decisions wouldn't require a hired staff of economists with technical expertise. And I never said that only scientists and engineers are necessary to make a government function. You need security experts too.

I know, but it's well known that intellectuals - without much interest or knowledge in economics - drift towards socialism and greatly overstate the efficacy of State measures. I imagine a climate like that would make it hard work for an economist to do his job.

I'd rather have a rules-based approach to government (which I suppose could be technocratic in a sense) and allowing each "section" of society to get on with itself rather than drag them all into one monolithic institution.

You can prattle on about a marginal increase in wealth all you like, it doesn't change the fact that there is a noticeable disparity in how workers in the third world live compared to those in the first.

So your arguing that the system which made first-world countries rich shouldn't be used to make third-world countries rich? Fucking bravo.

You think the disparity might have something to do with historical imperialism, contemporary protectionism, unstable kleptocratic governments and poor policy?

It's hardly marginal either, you really should look at how countries like China, Russia, Hong Kong, Singapore, Estonia and the Nordics have developed thanks to it throughout history. 

Why not?
I can understand you not wanting a cogboy to be doing the accounting but why shouldn't the cut off point be decided by a panel of biologists/ethicists? It'd be better than having the policy decided by religious diehards and bleeding hearts.

Because legislating is a different skill-set to what's required in the natural sciences. The solution isn't to stop the current people do what they're doing wrong and bring somebody in to make it right, it's to stop doing it altogether.

Imperialism made the first world rich, not capitalism. Capitalism was the means by which the manufacturing class seized control of the wealth away from the aristocracy.

That's just not true and belies your ignorance of economics. Life is not a zero-sum game. The wheel had not been invented in parts of Africa by the end of the 1800s. African conditions have grown enormously due to contacts with the West and, more recently, investment by East Asian countries like China. Was imperalism good? No, but to deny the costs to the mother country and the benefits to the colonies is purely ahistorical.

The idea that imperalism is what has given the countries' their wealth is a myth. Plain and simple. It contributed, sure, but the market is demonstrably a superior method.

Contemporary protectionism is all but non-existent. Most third-world governments are in the pockets of western corporations.

Yeah, that explains steel tariffs enacted by Obama as high as 118%, and don't forget all of those non-existence tariffs Customs Unions have.

The Nordics and Russia also benefited from Imperialism. As to the rest, you need only look at how the poor are treated to see how much capitalism has done for them.

America didn't. Estonia didn't. South Korea didn't. You can't seriously pin wealth creation on colonialism.

stopped reading there

you're a retard, lol

Poor wording, but the point is still pretty much the same.

It's a shame, to be honest. I actually thought you were quite historically aware.

Apparently not.

I have no idea what's going on in here right now

I proved Dave wrong so he went offline to sulk.

Oh......give me a tl;dr of everything. I tried to read but my brain started hurting then noticed challenger mentioned my name and thought "oh shit, what's going on now"

I don't really know to be honest.

Basically it ended by him making a bunch of false claims about colonialism and contemporary protectionism and calling me a retarded for claiming some parts of Africa hadn't adopted the wheel by the late 1800s.

We wouldn't be having boots on a ground if idiots like Bush and Obama stopped war mongering in damn first place. Every time a child gets killed in these strikes, the terrorists use it to drive recruitment and increase hatred of the U.S

So him pulling the troops out of Iraq and cleaning up Bush's stupidity is warmongering to you? Seriously? Fuck off.

I'll play the devil's advocate and say Obama needs to stop bypassing Congress and start working on bi-partisan legislation with Republicans

What?! Have you not been paying attention these last few years? He has to bypass Congress because the fucking Republicunts refuse to let him or the Democrats pass ANYTHING.

ITT:
Defending colonialism

I was "defending" colonialism.

I was saying wealth doesn't arise from colonialism to the same magnitude as free trade, since colonialism is inherently mercantilist.

Young man, I am disappointed hat you do not know my failures as president. Former President Bush was the one who signed an agreement with the Iraqi government to withdraw troops out by 2009. I had nothing to do with pulling out or forces from the country.

As president I have conducted military operations in Libya, increased the usage of drones, and have advocated for attacks against Syria. I am a warmonger and admit to such

I and the Democrat party refuse to conduct negotiations and only want things our way so we say screw the Republicans

Shut up, Kinder.

YouTube

political shit flinging had me like

Why do you think we come here?

It's all part of the circus.

i dun goof'd

that wasnt the video i meant to post

Eh, works either way.