/kc/ - Krautchan

diaspora of krautchan unite

Posting mode: Reply

Check to confirm you're not a robot
Drawing x size canvas

Remember to follow the rules

Max file size: 100.00 MB

Max files: 4

Max message length: 4096

Manage Board | Moderate Thread

Return | Catalog | Bottom

Expand All Images

(210.83 KB 503x446 file1.jpg)
Bernd 09/22/2018 (Sat) 21:37:26 [Preview] No. 19484
white people's problems: they're degenerates and going to extinct


Bernd 09/22/2018 (Sat) 21:44:08 [Preview] No.19485 del
(185.81 KB 516x290 killed-more-whites-3.png)
(81.93 KB 604x596 kadirov-14-words.jpg)

Bernd 09/23/2018 (Sun) 00:02:23 [Preview] No.19490 del
1453 we fucked your mothers

Economy Question Bernd 11/09/2018 (Fri) 17:19:40 [Preview] No.20501 del
(52.27 KB 907x769 real-gdp-1955.png)
Wasn't sure where to put this and a new thread might be unnecessary because there might not be much discussion. Also the question seems like a white people problem:
Why the economy has to grow? Redbull me on this, pls. Someone.

See? Places with black people don't even have economy so it's growth mostly a white people problem. And yellow but whatever.

Bernd 11/09/2018 (Fri) 18:11:31 [Preview] No.20504 del
I think an economy doesn't HAVE to grow, but white 1st world countries are attracted to growth and stability because they are wary of, and have legal infrastructures to prevent or at least mitigate major problems of the past.
Like the FDIC in America for instance so if a bank gets robbed or goes bankrupt the federal government actually insures the money in your bank account up to a certain amount. This was put in place after the Great Depression when banks were closing left and right. It was $100,000 for a long time but I'm fairly certain it's more now.
Also as an economy grows hopefully new industries and markets come along so the economy can get bigger in more ways than just one. A common example in basic economics classes is guys cutting lawns as there is no barrier to entry. If everyone starts cutting grass people will just cut prices till no one is making money cutting grass so the ones that need more money have to go find another job.
If you're some rich oil tycoon, say 30 years ago, you probably invested in other areas to diversify, stuff like IBM, real esate,, it's a safe bet for you in case oil were to dry up but it also serves to increase your yields while also serving the economy and keep money flowing.
A lot of what makes an economy run is faith and at the least the perception of stability imo.
In Africa tumultuous-ness is part of most of the governments so nothing can be assured because the powers that be may just swing by and take whatever they want anyway. There's no faith or credibility in things so it kills any drive for a citizen to strive which then becomes like a double edged sword and keeps them in the weeds.

Bernd 11/09/2018 (Fri) 19:33:48 [Preview] No.20506 del
Oh god. I've read Iliad just now and tried to read your post in hexameter.
So why I am asking is that I believe the job of economy is to produce and deliver the goods necessary for the functions of human life and the production of said goods. So basically a tool that serves human beans. But now it really does seem to me that economy became l'art pour l'art and people are there to serve it, to ensure it's growth. We are working on the growth of economy so we could grow the economy even more. Creating debt and use the money to make the economy grow so we can cover the debt so we can take even larger loans to grow economy further so we can take further loans - spiral this to infinity.
I don't know much about economy, so ofc I question myself if I'm right in this.
I believe people could live just fine without pumping the economy further and further, creating bunch of unnecessary stuff we have to buy just to make sure the economy is growing.

Bernd 11/09/2018 (Fri) 19:41:41 [Preview] No.20508 del
B-but degeneracy is an essential part of white culture!
t. Ancient Greece and Rome

Bernd 11/09/2018 (Fri) 19:53:07 [Preview] No.20509 del
And where are those cultures? They are extinct!

Bernd 11/09/2018 (Fri) 21:09:11 [Preview] No.20511 del
Greeks are indigenous Balkanoids mixed with Phoenicians though. They're mixed, not white.
>The Assembly is competent also to hear criminal charges, especially those involving the risk of capital punishment. The mode of execution varies according to the offence. Traitors and deserters are hanged on trees; cowards, shirkers, and sodomites are pressed down under a wicker hurdle into the slimy mud of a bog.
Also, while the Greeks and Romans were fucking boys, we threw homosexuals into bogs.

Bernd 11/09/2018 (Fri) 21:09:32 [Preview] No.20512 del
"Huwite" rather.

Bernd 11/09/2018 (Fri) 21:50:07 [Preview] No.20513 del
>not wanting to die in a war that has nothing to do with yourself is frowned upon
fuck, I hate that mindset. With Remembrance Day coming up, we're expected to remember those people as heroes who died for our sake. But in reality they were young men just like us forced and/or convinced into a war that could have been avoided, and dying by the hands of politicians who sat in their offices smoking and drinking, happy to send millions of fellow countrymen to their deaths. I doubt that they gave a shit about future generations like we portray them to. But they were convinced by propaganda artists that getting shot in a fucking ditch in a foreign country was an honourable death.

Bernd 11/09/2018 (Fri) 22:04:20 [Preview] No.20514 del
https://youtube.com/watch?v=rblfKREj50o [Embed]

economy Bernd 11/10/2018 (Sat) 08:00:19 [Preview] No.20515 del
Now I'm never gonna get more answers for my question here: >>20501
and replies to my additional information here: >>20506

Bernd 11/11/2018 (Sun) 01:01:10 [Preview] No.20531 del
-Economic growth can raise the poor's living standards without the contentious zero-sum game of class warfare.
-As wealth is power, choosing to stagnate in a world where everyone else is growing means a steady decrease in relative geopolitical strength, with potentially catastrophic results to national sovereignty in the long run. See China, which sat at a comfortable position at the time it began to stagnate but paid dearly for it after Europeans caught up and surpassed it centuries later.
-On undeveloped countries, economic growth can genuinely improve people's lives. Of course, this has diminishing returns, and thus Icelanders or Swiss stand little to gain from further growth.

Rich First World countries can seriously toy with the idea of giving up on the paradigm of economic growth at all costs and enjoy potential benefits in ecological conservation and societal & financial stability that may come from such a shift. The key problem, however, is point #2.
For Third World cases like mine, I still believe in the need for further growth and wealth, as speaking of "degrowth" and the like is absurd at our level of poverty.

>So why I am asking is that I believe the job of economy is to produce and deliver the goods necessary for the functions of human life and the production of said goods. So basically a tool that serves human beans. But now it really does seem to me that economy became l'art pour l'art and people are there to serve it, to ensure it's growth.
One Third World variant of this is developmentalism (or "National Developmentalism" as it's locally known), which doesn't even care about GDP but has a fixation on industries. What it advocates is heavy protectionism and state-controlled import substitution industrialization to achieve an autarchic industrial economy, which would theoretically secure a developed country status. This was attempted during Vargas' reign, the following republic, and, in a different but related model, under military dictatorship, covering half a century. What did they achieve? Brazil became South America's powerhouse, but goods at consumers' disposal were more expensive and shoddier than foreign ones (blocked due to protectionism). But according to developmentalists, this is fine: all that matters is having industries because industries magically make your country developed.
All those industries were in fact a sham, as key factors making them uncompetitive -poor infrastructure and an unqualified workforce- were adresssed partially or not at all, and by empowering labor legislation and, as a byproduct of their actions, cementing red tape, developmentalist elites actually lowered competitiveness. Once neoliberals dismantled trade barriers, many of these industries collapsed, and yet consumers can now access a much wider, cheaper and better range of goods than they could prior to the end of protectionism.
Nonetheless, we're still South America's largest industrial base. But it's hard to know how much of this is owed to developmentalism and how much of industrial growth would have "naturally" happened with another system. Developmentalists only came to power because they were backed by an urban, industrialized minority, and said minority only existed because industrialization was already taking place within the previous agrarian laissez-faire system (through using surplus capital from commodity exports to fund industries). It's sort of like the Bolsheviks, who are said to have industrialized an agrarian society but in fact only came to power because their society was already partially industrialized and would have continued to industrialize with or without Bolsheviks.
On the other hand, developmentalists are correct in asserting that being able to produce certain goods, regardless of their profitability, has geopolitical advantages, and this becomes most clear in times of sanctions or war.
So beyond asking what do policies achieve, it is also necessary to know what achievements one wants from economic policy. Is it access to consumer goods? Power?

Bernd 11/11/2018 (Sun) 08:18:34 [Preview] No.20536 del
Thanks both of you for the replies. I'll sit on it little, right now my thoughts are a little uncollectable and maybe others will have stuff to add.

Bernd 11/13/2018 (Tue) 21:00:38 [Preview] No.20567 del
(619.28 KB 1080x2019 015.jpg)
>tfw it's actually accurate

Bernd 11/14/2018 (Wed) 06:07:25 [Preview] No.20569 del
Can happen that life writes the strongest satire. Probably not everyone laughed on that particular pun tho.

Bernd 11/14/2018 (Wed) 06:21:13 [Preview] No.20570 del
My Lord...

Bernd 11/14/2018 (Wed) 16:13:32 [Preview] No.20573 del
There's a little context missing in that it was misty on that day and they wanted to use it to their advantage, I believe. Still retarded though.

Top | Return | Catalog | Post a reply