Fron my understanding the bulk of their sovereign wealth fund comes from socializing the profits of resource extraction within Norway. Minerals and fossil fuels primarily, not corporate taxes. Although those exist.
Taking a global view to the issue is not something I thought about. Admittedly I was taking a view country by country that focused on how the state is impacting the individual citizens within their borders.
I'll have to think more on this one. Evaluating whether or not a country is authoritarian towards its own people is useful for looking for places to migrate to or systems to replicate (at least in the short term), but it doesn't consider the greater suffering caused by those systems outside of borders.
I think that is a defensible position. I'd likely disagree on some nations and agree with others.
But overall yeah that's the general idea. Truly socialists states would certainly not be authoritarian. Where would you place a state like Norway with it's sovereign wealth fund?
Clearly some profits have been socialized and they do have robust safety nets/social programs, but they are undeniably still capitalist.
I think we should be able to understand that modern systems define what is and isn't authoritarian based on the degree of individual agency and political voice the average citizen of a nation has.
We don't need to get into the cultural evolutionary definitions of a state here. It's largely irrelevant.
Mind you I can agree that the term authoritarian is often used politically and doesn't include states it should like the USA. Which is clearly an oligarchy these days
Federal laws always overrule local law. It's the entirety of the Supremecy Clause in the constitution
Way older than Trump's presidency
Does that apply to municipalities or individuals. The town may have been able to do it
Also taking a boat overland takes forever, they don't sail well on land
Still a thing in Germany. Without such a steep markup too
Found just randomly on the street
Yeah the courts have often been ruling against the administration.
Even the supreme court has ruled against them
I never said it's a good place if you can calm the fuck down.
To me a concentration camp is for larger scale imprisonment.
It does do all the things you list though
Absolutely not federal employees, federally elected officials yes.
You don't want to empower random people with the ability to fire Dan at the CDC for working on the covid vaccine. Dan is a federal employee
I wouldn't call it a concentration camp. That refers more to things targeting mass groups of people.
This is a selective prison camp for political enemies and anyone deemed "useful" to torture for information
And comparatively basically every "developed' nation is doing better than the USA.
Sure they have their problems but at least they get affordable health care and time off work
Didn't make the list, what have I been doing with my time
I think they may actually believe themselves, this is going beyond normal trolling.
I mean I stopped responding so they started double replying. Very odd
Yeah this guy is really weird. If they're just lonely there really need to find another way to interact with people
Just copying your argument style....
Here I'll skip ahead for you.
I DECLARE STRAWMAN
There now what you say is automatically wrong :)
Yep this is why I deleted to disengage last time. I knew it wasn't worth it, rude and weird.
✌️
Fron my understanding the bulk of their sovereign wealth fund comes from socializing the profits of resource extraction within Norway. Minerals and fossil fuels primarily, not corporate taxes. Although those exist.
Taking a global view to the issue is not something I thought about. Admittedly I was taking a view country by country that focused on how the state is impacting the individual citizens within their borders.
I'll have to think more on this one. Evaluating whether or not a country is authoritarian towards its own people is useful for looking for places to migrate to or systems to replicate (at least in the short term), but it doesn't consider the greater suffering caused by those systems outside of borders.
All very good points from you
I think that is a defensible position. I'd likely disagree on some nations and agree with others.
But overall yeah that's the general idea. Truly socialists states would certainly not be authoritarian. Where would you place a state like Norway with it's sovereign wealth fund?
Clearly some profits have been socialized and they do have robust safety nets/social programs, but they are undeniably still capitalist.
I think we should be able to understand that modern systems define what is and isn't authoritarian based on the degree of individual agency and political voice the average citizen of a nation has.
We don't need to get into the cultural evolutionary definitions of a state here. It's largely irrelevant.
Mind you I can agree that the term authoritarian is often used politically and doesn't include states it should like the USA. Which is clearly an oligarchy these days
Authoritarian does not refer to the monopoly of state violence. It'd be a pointless term otherwise
Why are you fishing for a further argument on a day's old post? That's kinda weird dude.
You already responded to this comment yesterday. Forget to switch the the alt?