Jump to content
270soft Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


admin_270 last won the day on October 30 2012

admin_270 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

82 Excellent

About admin_270

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. admin_270

    download and key

  2. admin_270

    My 2020 Scenario - Now Available For Download

    Ok, this 'takes back endorsement' bug has been fixed in the latest internal. The reason Kristol was endorsing at the start is that he's set to endorse by Jan. 2nd, 2020. Default start is Jan. 1st, 2020.
  3. admin_270

    California and Wyoming Imbalance

    To be clear, and using the everyday definitions of 'socialism' and 'capitalism' above, I think the U.S. is basically still a capitalist country, but with increasingly socialist aspects. So, 'a moderately socialist country within the Western context.'
  4. admin_270

    California and Wyoming Imbalance

    @WVProgressive "So you're going to throw out and ignore, any and all theory, and just go with a singular definition? Also you seem to think that theirs no such thing as Anarchist forms of Socialism, which isn't true..." When I said "within a Western context, the U.S. is a moderately socialist country" I was working with a definition of socialism that's roughly the dictionary definition. With that definition, the things I listed are socialist (or certainly can be). If you want to talk about a different kind of socialism, that's fine.
  5. admin_270

    California and Wyoming Imbalance

    @WVProgressive "Are you saying capitalism can only exist without a government (or at least a government that only uses violence to defend private property)?" Practically and in a pure sense, yes. Socialism erodes the autonomy of private enterprise and decision making, introducing governmental influence. It's a spectrum, with various levels and aspects. The question is how much socialism vs. capitalism do you have? Definition of capitalism from Merriam-Webster. "an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market" https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/capitalism The U.S. government (at all levels) impinges on capitalism in all sorts of ways.
  6. admin_270

    California and Wyoming Imbalance

    Here's the 1st definition of socialism from Merriam-Webster. "any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods" https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism The U.S. is a much more socialist country now than it was, say, 120 years ago. Yes, programs like Medicare are socialist concessions to avoid full-out socialism.
  7. admin_270

    California and Wyoming Imbalance

    Yes, within a Western context, the U.S. is a moderately socialist country. Significant tax rates, market and product regulations, public health coverage (Medicare, Medicaid, VA), food assistance, housing subsidies, vast numbers of public educational institutions, tens of millions of people employed by the government (at various levels), a large industrial-military complex, and all sorts of government programs that modify or undermine private enterprise. Good night, WV.
  8. admin_270

    California and Wyoming Imbalance

    @Patine "After 18 years, do you, or anyone else here, still believe the term "War on Terror," is a valid and legitimate term" No, I think it's a silly term. However, it has entered into the language and refers to something specific. I'm using it here simply because I was responding to WVProgressive's discussion of it.
  9. admin_270

    California and Wyoming Imbalance

    @WVProgressive I'm not trying to say that crashes are fine. I'm saying the fact countries have boom-bust cycles doesn't mean the Anglosphere hasn't had unprecedented prosperity for the last 70 years. Even at low points in these cycles, people generally have been tremendously materially well off - historically and compared to most other countries. I don't know what you mean by 'ultra-capitalist'. I view the U.S. as a moderately socialist country. Yes, of course - the definition of middle class differs, especially in academic debates. However, I think in the everyday American context putting middle class in between lower and upper, and defining it largely in terms of income or net worth, is a fairly intuitive way to do it. Having said that, I don't really want to argue over the word - which is why I put it between inverted commas to start with. By an increasing global 'middle class', I mean the increase in people having enough money to buy many of the things middle income earners for some time have been able to buy in places like the U.S. This expansion has been massive and dramatic in many places (and Patine gave various examples) over the last 50 years.
  10. admin_270

    California and Wyoming Imbalance

    @WVProgressive I have no problem with including the middle class in the working class. Middle class is in distinction to the lower and upper classes, which are determined largely by income. Of course people should work to ameliorate the conditions of the poorest among us. But that is compatible with noting the poverty the U.S. faces now is mild by historical standards. No, endless war isn't ok. Rather, my point is to put U.S. military action re the war on terror in context. The conflicts are limited, and most of the world has had peace. Again, you can criticize boom-bust cycles, but if you don't notice that the overall trend is toward higher levels of material prosperity, you're not putting it in context! "Are you arguing that because someone owns a car that means they have no right to strive for a better world?" Isn't that in the car purchase agreement somewhere? Regardless, this point seems like a complete non sequitur. Nowhere did I say anything like this. "Wow your right this totally means that the wage system, and capitalism, isn't exploitative, because those wages happen to be high" There are valid critiques of wages, jobs, and so on, in modern America. Noting median family income has gone up is not incompatible with thinking things could be made better from here on out. However, again, the context is that *things have gotten better* materially in the U.S.
  11. admin_270

    California and Wyoming Imbalance

    @WVProgressive 1a. The Anglosphere has had a major crash. Of course countries have economic ups and downs, but material prosperity in the Anglosphere is at historically very high levels. Look at articles like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States U.S. real median household income was at an all time high as of 2017 1b. The Anglosphere is headed for another major crash. Of course countries will have crashes and booms in the future. 2. America has unleashed endless war upon the world. Sure, I'm critical of the war on terror too. But significant military conduct is limited to a handful of countries. For most of the world, the past 50 years has been an era of great peace. 3. Hurtling toward irreversible climate change. Sure, lots of people are concerned about ramifications of possible climate change in the future. But this is in the future, not the past 70 years. 4. Poverty and hunger are still problems faced by millions of Americans. America has always had a significant % of people facing material hardship. But the biggest problem in the lower-class in America isn't hunger, it's obesity! 5. Middle class doesn't exist. Incomes don't magically disappear at $30K in the U.S.
  12. admin_270

    California and Wyoming Imbalance

    @Patine These broken political systems are part and parcel of unprecedented peace and prosperity, for the Anglosphere and for Europe. Why do you say that 'global civilization is practically on life-support, limping from crisis to crisis'? My view of the past 70 years is a vast elimination of absolute poverty, expansion of the global 'middle class', and significant increases in life expectancy.
  13. admin_270

    California and Wyoming Imbalance

    Sounds like TPW is making an argument to shift the burden of proof. If something's already in place, there were reasons for putting it in place, so I'm (TPW) not going to start by arguing for that system. Rather, the onus is on you to show what your alternative is and how it's been demonstrated to produce better outcomes (or something like that). This is something like 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it.'
  14. admin_270

    California and Wyoming Imbalance

    I would view the Senate's worth in terms of how it positively affects legislative outcomes, executive appointments, and treaties. It is justified to the extent it makes the country better, overall, through time. Judging it by just one session would be a bit silly. Is it useful to have extra oversight on executive appointments? Is it useful to treat states as having interests in themselves (so geographic representation, not just popular)? Is it useful to have a senior body that decides on treaties?
  15. admin_270

    California and Wyoming Imbalance

    Do you know what is required legally to get these kinds of electoral reforms made in the U.S.?