BF2S Forums Presidential Election 2016

Anyway, I've always liked Slavic women, that they're my only hope makes it less painful.

And the Viking genes?

Surely this is the peak male athlete.

sorry jay you're a perfectly ordinary looking bloke. i'm not casting aspersions. but not sure why dilbert has a hard on for nordic genes. more of that repressed aryan supremacism that the stunted and ugly like to tout, no doubt (like that nordic god adolf hitler...)

Last edited by uziq (2017-02-27 04:58:58)

you're going to have to enlighten me on your hierarchy of races dilbert. i'm not sure why i should feel ignominy at being english rather than swedish. my girlfriend is half-iranian and she's way out of your pasty little racist league. pray tell what you're prattling on about ...

don't joke, dilbert really believes in that stuff.

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Jay wrote:

My wife is norwegian/german. I haz the master race sitting next to me in bed watching Paw Patrol

Does anyone in your family have a job?

I was talking about my son, but yes, my wife does quite well. Maternity leave for another 2 months though.

giant welfare scheme worked for someone in this thread.

What's the return investment of a bomb?

Last edited by Superior Mind (2017-02-27 12:23:06)

Superior Mind wrote:

What's the return investment of a bomb?

Lots of debt with interest.

uziq wrote:

Jay wrote:

It kind of will. They can all work in bomb factories.

there's a term for societies geared entirely towards militarism. (very fash-ionable right now).

the government won't just keep putting out tenders for lots of new weaponry and munitions without using them, will it?

a country preparing for war tends to find itself pretty soon going to war – often on the flimsiest of pretexts, too.

I was mostly being sarcastic. Government spending on the military is really the only long-term political jobs program that our country has. A vote to increase spending usually comes with a promise from a defense contractor to park a factory in your district or state. You get to be a job creator, which is gold to a politician. This is, of course, an absolutely godawful way for any business to run, as it completely ignores pricing dynamics and any other real economic factor like worker skills etc. - Adam Smith be damned. It also turns our state department into the lead sales negotiator on arms deals rather than diplomacy. Alternative political spending, like infrastructure upgrades, only create temporary jobs that last as long as the project does.

So, if you're a guy that came into office on the promise of job creation, these are your only real options, unless of course, you want to take the long term path that includes tax reform, making government more efficient, removing unnecessary regulations etc. But then you don't get to cut any ribbons.

uziq wrote:

assuming that any of those 'long-term path' solutions are even going to fix america's economy and its sliding place in the global system.

how do you really compete with third-world labour prices by cutting corporation tax and 'removing regulations'? sounds like a race to the bottom.

Because theoretically, you save them a lot of money on both their tax sheets and in compliance costs, money that could then be freed up to be spent to create new jobs. Will some of it go to shareholders? Undoubtedly. I think that one of the most beneficent tax reforms that could be made would be to allow companies to deduct training costs. More needs to be done to encourage on-the-job-training because, as it is, many companies refuse to do any training at all and only hire people that have been in the field. For instance, to become a welder, you need to go to an expensive trade school and pay for the costs out of pocket in order to earn a certificate, all before you even apply for jobs. This is something more companies should be encouraged to handle in house.