Recent posts

#31

Gaming HQ / Re: Europa Universalis V confi...

Last post by HVC - Today at 01:27:52 PM

Someone was having issues on another forum.  They said they updated their bios and it fixed the issue. Why, no idea. But too late now.

#32

Off the Record / Re: The AI dooooooom thread

Last post by DGuller - Today at 01:27:43 PM

I suppose I'm fatalist in the other way that I don't think there's an "answer" to the economy or politics. There will be boom and bust/cycles/pendulum swings of all kinds from politics to economics to cultural or social stuff.

Yes of course. But the lesson we learned from the 1875-1929 era was we can't just let them happen. We have to attempt to fight those cycles. By "unleashing" the economy from its shackles we are right back into disastrous busts ravaging the world every twenty years or so. The economy must be regulated to reduce the disastrous impact of those busts. The government must simply do everything in its power to limit these bubbles and mitigate their damage. They will still happen of course. See the failure of the...what were they called? The Nifty Fifty? The fifty "can't lose" stocks of the 1960s when they finally did lose in the 1970s. But as bad as that was it was no Depression of 1875 or Economic Crisis of 2008.

If you don't let the bubbles inflate, how are you going to have economy recover from the last bust?

#33

Off the Record / Re: What does a TRUMP presiden...

Last post by Admiral Yi - Today at 01:25:30 PM

They must have been idiots to enter into such unfair arrangements, especially since the US were the preeminent power of the day.

I agree.  They were trying to be high minded and ended up being naive.

#34

Off the Record / Re: What does a TRUMP presiden...

Last post by Jacob - Today at 01:23:50 PM

Yes, and the more offensive flaw in his logic is the notion of freeloading. That is a derogatory term used to denote that nothing was given in return.  You called me out for swearing last time. But that is fucking offensive. Said with the greatest of respect on behalf of all members of the Canadian military who have died fighting in wars that were mainly started by or in the interests of the United States of America, with Remembrance Day coming up.

Indeed. Several countries had a death rate per capita quite close to the US' in Afghanistan (and in the case of Georgia, exceeding the US' deaths per capita). To discount that as "freeloading" is pure smug arrogance. Even where the ratios aren't close, those many countries still sacrificed the lives of their people in support of American policy goals.

Similarly, various NATO countries have spied on their own citizens and on other allied governments on behalf of the US. The US have been allowed functionally a veto on all manner of security and economic decisions. American integration with NATO and Europe allowed the US to project power and pursue foreign policy objectives outside of NATO's areas of concern (Greenland basing which is all about protecting the North American mainland, using American bases in Europe to project power into the Middle East and provide material support for Israel, and so on).

Perhaps it's reasonable to argue that the balance wasn't fair - especially if you're in a phase of renegotiating the relationship - but:

• To dismiss the contributions as essentially nothing is both inaccurate and destructive to the relationship.
• It raises the question why the US - from a position of unparalleled domination and power - agreed to enter into exchanges that were allegedly so profoundly unfair.

#35

Gaming HQ / Re: Europa Universalis V confi...

Last post by DGuller - Today at 01:19:35 PM

How much space you have on your C drive?

I have 300 GB free.

I give up then.

That's what I said.     Not my job to make Paradox games work.  HOI4 and EU5 are the only ones I recall crashing to desktop in the last 10 years or so.

#36

Gaming HQ / Re: Europa Universalis V confi...

Last post by Tamas - Today at 01:16:26 PM

Valmy, I agree, I think th early start date is by far the weakest point of the game.

Let's say that after the very land-based Hungary game I want to explore the new world. Sure, I just need to build up Portugal for a 100 years and then I can go. I have passed like 40 years in my current game, took me a couple of days.

#37

Gaming HQ / Re: Europa Universalis V confi...

Last post by Tamas - Today at 01:13:49 PM

How much space you have on your C drive?

I have 300 GB free.

I give up then.

#38

Off the Record / Re: The AI dooooooom thread

Last post by HVC - Today at 01:12:51 PM

Hey we plant tulips to this day,  so the fad never fully died out

#39

Off the Record / Re: What does a TRUMP presiden...

Last post by Admiral Yi - Today at 01:12:32 PM

And that is the flaw in Yi's argument.  We either believe that there is a potential threat for NATO, or there isn't.  I don't think anyone disputes that for a long time, most NATO members neglected miltary readiness because there was no perceived threat (a calculus that changed dramatically in the last three years).  And we kept up military readiness because we had lots of other obligations/interests in/outside of NATO...even after the fall of the USSR.

If we really cared that much only about expenditures...we could have just as easily pull out of bases in Europe, and reduce the spending specifically oriented towards Europe, while still also saying "we are fully committed to NATO and Article 5". 

But nope, our current administration has to be stupid for no apparent gain.

That is not a flaw in my argument.  My argument is not that NATO force levels right after the fall of the Berlin Wall were too low.  Russia looked like a crippled state.  I had my hand out waiting for that peace dividend too.  Rather my argument is that the leaders of the member states met up and agreed that the fair and equitable distriubtion of costs of common defense was 2% of GDP.  Every member state agreed.  100% unanimity.  The time for a lively debate about what distribution of costs were fair, or about the sufficiency of armed forces generated by that distribution scheme to deter Russia or beat them in a war, was before the agreement, not after.  Then they repeated the farce a few years later.  So on the one hand it's personal because I feel lied to.  I've been played for a patsy.  From the policy POV it's suboptimal because lower trust reduces the opportunities for mutual cooperation.

#40

Off the Record / Re: The AI dooooooom thread

Last post by Valmy - Today at 01:12:07 PM

I suppose I'm fatalist in the other way that I don't think there's an "answer" to the economy or politics. There will be boom and bust/cycles/pendulum swings of all kinds from politics to economics to cultural or social stuff.

Yes of course. But the lesson we learned from the 1875-1929 era was we can't just let them happen. We have to attempt to fight those cycles. By "unleashing" the economy from its shackles we are right back into disastrous busts ravaging the world every twenty years or so. The economy must be regulated to reduce the disastrous impact of those busts. The government must simply do everything in its power to limit these bubbles and mitigate their damage. They will still happen of course. See the failure of the...what were they called? The Nifty Fifty? The fifty "can't lose" stocks of the 1960s when they finally did lose in the 1970s. But as bad as that was it was no Depression of 1875 or Economic Crisis of 2008.