Youtube comments of Fredinno (@innosam123).

  1. 6200
  2. 3700
  3. 3000
  4. 1200
  5. 868
  6. 472
  7. 436
  8. 357
  9. 301
  10. 278
  11. 228
  12. 201
  13. 183
  14. 179
  15. 171
  16. 170
  17. 166
  18. 148
  19. 145
  20. 140
  21. 137
  22. 118
  23. 117
  24. Why is it that every timeline that Germany is on the losing side of WW2 does Germany end up with the Oder-Neisse borders? They don’t make sense for anyone unless you’re Stalin and deliberately trying to move Poland and Germany as far away from you as possible and have no problem with forced expulsions and genocide. Though this is kind of a minor gripe as well, it seems unlikely Romania and Bulgaria would still surrender to the Soviets, since the Allies could easily capture Adrianopole and move north- and neither wanted to be under Soviet domination. Hungary might become a Soviet puppet if Operation Margarethe still works out, but with the allies closer and Soviets farther, that seems to be more a toss-up. Bohemia was also mostly unoccupied when the war ended and isn’t the easiest part of Europe to invade, so unless it’s specifically doled out to the Soviets, it would also likely go to the West. Basically, the Warsaw Pact wouldn’t exist. Would Morocco and Tunisia remain French? Also, Algeria kind of means there’d be a lot more Arabs in France. So you could end up with the awkward situation where there are more Muslims in France than Catholics. France doesn’t have the demographics to assimilate Algeria without it also going a lot the other way around. Though, overall, pretty good video. I went into this thinking that nothing would change because the Axis would mop up the weak forces left in Algeria, but then I remembered- this is Benito we’re talking about here.
    115
  25. 109
  26. 107
  27. 106
  28. 105
  29. 103
  30. 95
  31. 95
  32. 90
  33. 72
  34. 72
  35. 70
  36. 69
  37. 68
  38. 62
  39. 59
  40. 58
  41. 57
  42. 53
  43. 53
  44. 52
  45. 52
  46. 52
  47. 52
  48. 51
  49. 50
  50. 47
  51. 46
  52. 46
  53. 44
  54. 44
  55. 43
  56. 42
  57. 41
  58. 40
  59. 40
  60. 39
  61. 39
  62. 38
  63. 38
  64. 35
  65. 35
  66. 33
  67. 33
  68. 33
  69. 32
  70. 32
  71. 31
  72. 31
  73. 30
  74. 30
  75. 29
  76. 29
  77. 29
  78. 29
  79. 28
  80. 28
  81. 27
  82. 27
  83. 27
  84. 27
  85. 26
  86. 26
  87. 26
  88. 25
  89. 25
  90. 24
  91. 24
  92. 23
  93. 23
  94. 23
  95. 22
  96. 22
  97. 22
  98. 22
  99. 22
  100. 22
  101. 21
  102. 20
  103. 20
  104. 20
  105. 20
  106. 20
  107. 19
  108. 19
  109. 18
  110. 18
  111. 18
  112. 18
  113. 18
  114. TBH, a Depression is not likely. You showed the Debt-to-GDP ratio as a a supporting factor in your argument- but it’s only a meaningful number if you include private as well as public debt to GDP. Private debt to GDP in the developed world has fallen since 2008, resulting in overall stagnation or decline in total debt-to-GDP. Economists generally agree that public debt is less of an issue than private debt due to the fact they can just print money (which has issues, but not as bad as private sector defaults.) There is a reason Japan has such a high government debt-to-GDP and is still a stable, functioning economy. Worst case scenario is stagflation. Second, despite the arguments from Austrian economists, there has not been a single economic depression since 1946 (COVID was artificial, and cheating- if I included it, I would also have to include the similar 1920 depression.) Meanwhile, from 1830-1930, there were 3 depressions. Arguably, without interventionism, there would have been 2 more depressions- the late 1970s, and 2008. No inflation… and worse economic performance. Global currencies have always been maintained by the geopolitical and commercial strength of the nations backing it. Britain was not the only nation with currencies backed by Gold. Its decline coincides almost perfectly with its decline as a superpower. Has it been abused? Yes. So did Britain. That’s just how it works. Countries use their power for good and evil. Is it right? Arguably no, but that’s not the point. This is the same “guilt” you’ve criticized the modern left for. —- Note also that the current bout of inflation is also accompanied by reindustrialization and economic growth in North America. No matter how badly Biden tries to fuck it up.
    18
  115. 18
  116. 17
  117. 17
  118. 17
  119. 17
  120. 17
  121. 17
  122. 17
  123. 17
  124. 17
  125. 16
  126. 16
  127. 16
  128. 16
  129. 16
  130. 16
  131. 15
  132. 15
  133. 15
  134. 15
  135. 15
  136. 15
  137. 15
  138. 15
  139. 15
  140. 15
  141. 15
  142. 14
  143. 14
  144. 14
  145. 14
  146. 14
  147. 14
  148. 14
  149. 13
  150. 13
  151. 13
  152. 13
  153. 13
  154. 13
  155. 13
  156. 13
  157. 13
  158. 12
  159. 12
  160. 12
  161. 11
  162. 11
  163. 11
  164. 11
  165. 11
  166. 11
  167. 11
  168. 11
  169. 11
  170. 10
  171. 10
  172. 10
  173. 10
  174. 10
  175. 10
  176. 10
  177. 10
  178. 10
  179. 10
  180. 10
  181. 10
  182. 10
  183. 10
  184. 10
  185. 10
  186. 10
  187. 10
  188. 10
  189. 10
  190. 10
  191. 10
  192. 9
  193. 9
  194. 9
  195. You're Spying Morgenthau results in a Germany already split in at least 2. Honestly, Germany losing East Germany has proven to be enough to stop it from being a dominant European power. Again, I would like to point out that there’s enough Germans in Poland to cause major headaches. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_changes_of_Poland_immediately_after_World_War_II#/media/File%3ACurzon_line_en.svg I mean, what do you expect when 1/3rd your nation is composed of a hostile ethnic group? Do the Poles even really want that land? There were a lot of plans to utterly destroy Germany by forcing it to pay huge reparations and deindustrialization at Yalta, which also didn’t go anywhere- largely because it would have held back the wider European economy and resulted in one of the worst genocides in Europe. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgenthau_Plan#Implementation And even THIS plan didn’t include the Oder- Neisse borders, btw- even the Western Allies in a genocidal mood didn’t want the Oder-Neisse borders. There is no way that happens unless Stalin was total control of Poland. Romania and Bulgaria surrendered to the Soviets because they had no choice and could see they were doomed. If the Western Allies are in Greece, they DO have a choice. Romania in particular still had an army that could at least slow down the Soviets before the Allies could move up to there. The worst that happens may be the Romanians lose all of the land east of the Carpathians and/or is forced to be a neutral buffer state.
    9
  196. 9
  197. 9
  198. 9
  199. 9
  200. 9
  201. 9
  202. Peter Zeihan says hi. ... OK, no, but seriously, you should probably watch his stuff. This is a pretty interesting perspective though. I skimmed parts of it, but I've wanted to add my take as well, so here we go: I have studied China a lot: I would point out that Land-based trade orders are inherently inferior to sea-based ones in terms of cost of trade, and if the US was to blockade China, even if everything worked out well with the Belt and Road, it would still be a massive blow to Chinese manufacturing and trade. China is not the only cheap manufacturer, and it's not really especially good at high-end manufacturing (assuming the trade war doesn't kill that option in its cradle). China has also relied on the Belt and Road to prop up its 'Rust Belt' Northeast, which WILL inevitably decline even further eventually- and it will have the same problems as the American Rust Belt. Debt has also increased to levels at or exceeding the US in relative terms, assuming you choose to take Chinese data at face value. That's not encouraging for a developing economy. China may become a global power. But my worry is that Xi knows that the Chinese have already squandered its opportunity to be one, or are losing their chance as the world turns against them, their population ages, and their debt turns bad. Desperate people will do desperate things. Like invade Taiwan or India. In other words, the issue isn't that China is going to overtake the US. It's that China wants to- and is losing its chance.
    9
  203. 9
  204. 9
  205. 9
  206. 9
  207. 9
  208. 9
  209. 9
  210. 8
  211. 8
  212. 8
  213. 8
  214. 8
  215. 8
  216. 8
  217. 8
  218. 8
  219. 8
  220. 8
  221. 8
  222. 8
  223. 8
  224. 8
  225. 8
  226. 8
  227. 8
  228. 8
  229. 7
  230. 7
  231. 7
  232. 7
  233. 7
  234. 7
  235. 7
  236. 7
  237. 7
  238. 7
  239. 7
  240. 7
  241. 7
  242. 7
  243. 7
  244. 7
  245. 7
  246. 7
  247. 7
  248. 7
  249. 7
  250. 7
  251. 7
  252. 7
  253. 7
  254. 7
  255. 7
  256. 7
  257. 7
  258. 7
  259. 7
  260. 7
  261. 7
  262. 7
  263. 7
  264. 7
  265. 7
  266. 7
  267. 7
  268. 7
  269. 6
  270. 6
  271. 6
  272. 6
  273. 6
  274. 6
  275. 6
  276. 6
  277. 6
  278. 6
  279. 6
  280. 6
  281. 6
  282. 6
  283. 6
  284. 6
  285. 6
  286. 6
  287. LOL Diamond 101 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism “Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit.[1][2][3][4] Characteristics central to capitalism include private property, capital accumulation, wage labor, voluntary exchange, a price system and competitive markets.[5][6] In a capitalist market economy, decision-making and investments are determined by every owner of wealth, property or production ability in financial and capital markets whereas prices and the distribution of goods and services are mainly determined by competition in goods and services markets.[7][8]” Mercantilism can exist in a capitalistic system- in fact most countries are mercantilistic to varying degrees. Rome definitely had everything in the definition (at least before the Crisis of the 3rd Century). https://www.mikeanderson.biz/2009/02/capitalism-in-roman-republic.html “As Rome grew the demand for business grew, but the nobility considered merchant activities off limits for them – it lacked dignitas. Since there was no government administration the Senate looked to the Knights to handle the business of the Republic. The first of these “businessmen” were called Publicans. They were employed by the state to manage public contracts: to collect taxes, manage mining companies, and oversee road construction. These contracts were awarded at auction and their duration was five years. During the Punic Wars Publicans built ships for the Roman Navy and equiped the Roman Army. The nobility began to covert the profits of the Knights and become involved in sea trade, until a law was passed in 218 BC forbidding Senators from owning ships with a larger capacity of more than 300 amphorae (1 amp= 6 gal). In 215 three Publican contractors were censured because they provided financing to Spanish tribes (the enemy). They scuttled their ships and sued the Republic for reimbursement for the loss. The Senate chose to utilize the Knights commercially, instead of creating a civil service, and disregarded their political claims. But the power of the Knights grew and they were able to exert great influence as a class. In 169 BC the censor Tiberius Gracchus cancelled all Publican contracts because of corruption, but the Knights rebelled and accused him of treason against the state. Tiberius was acquited, but the Knights has flexed their muscles. By the fall of the Republic there were hundreds of corporations selling shares to investors. Manufacturing and trades flourished: including furniture making, leatherwork, weaving, metalworking, stoneworking, and food processing.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMYruhJb8e0 Shows Rome had a primitive banking system. Also, Denmark has a tax to GDP ratio of 45%. Any more, and they’d actually be losing money due to the Laffer Curve. Ancient Rome? 3% wealth tax, plus a 2.5% customs tax (and other taxes, but none were higher than single digits %). They were practically Reaganistic in tax policy.
    6
  288. 6
  289. 6
  290. 6
  291. 6
  292. 6
  293. 6
  294. 6
  295. 6
  296. 6
  297. 6
  298. 6
  299. 6
  300. 6
  301. 6
  302. 6
  303. 6
  304. 6
  305. 6
  306. 6
  307. 6
  308. 6
  309. 6
  310. 6
  311. 6
  312. 6
  313. 6
  314. 5
  315. 5
  316. 5
  317. 5
  318. 5
  319. 5
  320. 5
  321. 5
  322. 5
  323. 5
  324. 5
  325. 5
  326. 5
  327. 5
  328. 5
  329. 5
  330. 5
  331. 5
  332. 5
  333. 5
  334. 5
  335. 5
  336. 5
  337. 5
  338. 5
  339. 5
  340. 5
  341. 5
  342. 5
  343. 5
  344. 5
  345. 5
  346. 5
  347. 5
  348. 5
  349. 5
  350. 5
  351. 5
  352. 5
  353. 5
  354. 5
  355. 5
  356. 5
  357. 5
  358. 5
  359. 5
  360. 5
  361. 5
  362. 5
  363. 5
  364. 5
  365. 5
  366. 5
  367. 5
  368. 5
  369. 5
  370. 4
  371. 4
  372. 4
  373. 4
  374. 4
  375. 4
  376. 4
  377. 4
  378. 4
  379. 4
  380. 4
  381. 4
  382. 4
  383. 4
  384. 4
  385. 4
  386. 4
  387. 4
  388. 4
  389. 4
  390. 4
  391. 4
  392. 4
  393. 4
  394. 4
  395. 4
  396. 4
  397. 4
  398. 4
  399. 4
  400. 4
  401. 4
  402. 4
  403. 4
  404. 4
  405. 4
  406. 4
  407. 4
  408. 4
  409. 4
  410. 4
  411. 4
  412. 4
  413. 4
  414. 4
  415. 4
  416. 4
  417. 4
  418. 4
  419. 4
  420. 4
  421. 4
  422. 4
  423. 4
  424. 4
  425. 4
  426. 4
  427. 4
  428. 4
  429. 4
  430. 4
  431. 4
  432. 4
  433. 4
  434. 4
  435. 4
  436. 4
  437. 4
  438. 4
  439. 4
  440. 4
  441. 4
  442. 4
  443. 4
  444. 4
  445. 4
  446. 4
  447. 4
  448. 4
  449. 4
  450. 4
  451. 4
  452. 4
  453. 4
  454. 4
  455. 4
  456. 4
  457. 4
  458. 4
  459. 4
  460. 4
  461. 4
  462. 4
  463. 4
  464. 4
  465. 3
  466. 3
  467. 3
  468. 3
  469. 3
  470. 3
  471. 3
  472. 3
  473. 3
  474. 3
  475. 3
  476. 3
  477. 3
  478. 3
  479. 3
  480. 3
  481. 3
  482. 3
  483. 3
  484. 3
  485. 3
  486. 3
  487. 3
  488. 3
  489. 3
  490. 3
  491. 3
  492. 3
  493. 3
  494. 3
  495. 3
  496. 3
  497. 3
  498. 3
  499. 3
  500. 3
  501. 3
  502. 3
  503. 3
  504. 3
  505. 3
  506. 3
  507. 3
  508. 3
  509. 3
  510. 3
  511. 3
  512. 3
  513. 3
  514. 3
  515. 3
  516. 3
  517. 3
  518. 3
  519. 3
  520. 3
  521. 3
  522. 3
  523. 3
  524. 3
  525. 3
  526. 3
  527. 3
  528. 3
  529. 3
  530. 3
  531. 3
  532. 3
  533. 3
  534. 3
  535. 3
  536. 3
  537. 3
  538. 3
  539. 3
  540. 3
  541. 3
  542. 3
  543. 3
  544. 3
  545. 3
  546. 3
  547. 3
  548. 3
  549. 3
  550. 3
  551. 3
  552. 3
  553. 3
  554. 3
  555. 3
  556. 3
  557. 3
  558. 3
  559. 3
  560. 3
  561. 3
  562. 3
  563. 3
  564. 3
  565. 3
  566. 3
  567. 3
  568. 3
  569. 3
  570. 3
  571. 3
  572. 3
  573. 3
  574. 3
  575. 3
  576. 3
  577. 3
  578. 3
  579. 3
  580. 3
  581. 3
  582. 3
  583. 3
  584. 3
  585. 3
  586. 3
  587. 3
  588. 3
  589. 3
  590. 3
  591. 3
  592. 3
  593. 3
  594. 3
  595. 3
  596. 3
  597. 3
  598. 3
  599. 3
  600. 3
  601. 3
  602. 3
  603. 3
  604. 3
  605. 3
  606. 3
  607. 3
  608. 3
  609. 3
  610. 3
  611. 3
  612. 3
  613. 3
  614. 3
  615. 3
  616. 3
  617. 3
  618. 3
  619. 3
  620. 3
  621. 3
  622. 3
  623. 3
  624. 3
  625. 3
  626. 3
  627. 3
  628. 3
  629. 3
  630. 3
  631. 3
  632. 2
  633. 2
  634. 2
  635. 2
  636. 2
  637. 2
  638. 2
  639. 2
  640. 2
  641. 2
  642. 2
  643. 2
  644. 2
  645. 2
  646. 2
  647. 2
  648. 2
  649. 2
  650. 2
  651. 2
  652. 2
  653. 2
  654. 2
  655. 2
  656. 2
  657. 2
  658. 2
  659. 2
  660. 2
  661. 2
  662. 2
  663. 2
  664. 2
  665. 2
  666. 2
  667. 2
  668. 2
  669. 2
  670. 2
  671. 2
  672. 2
  673. 2
  674. 2
  675. 2
  676. 2
  677. 2
  678. 2
  679. 2
  680. 2
  681. 2
  682. 2
  683. 2
  684. 2
  685. 2
  686. 2
  687. 2
  688. 2
  689. 2
  690. 2
  691. 2
  692. 2
  693. 2
  694. 2
  695. 2
  696. 2
  697. 2
  698. 2
  699. 2
  700. 2
  701. 2
  702. 2
  703. 2
  704. 2
  705. 2
  706. 2
  707. 2
  708. 2
  709. 2
  710. 2
  711. 2
  712. 2
  713. 2
  714. 2
  715. 2
  716. 2
  717. 2
  718.  @motherlandbot6837  “Vassals” whose payment basically consists of military bases and tribute payment for them in the form of foreign policy alignment and trade deals, in exchange for being protected by the biggest military in the world and having market access to the largest economy in the world. Yes, by a certain given definition of vassal, yes. But very loose vassals. More like the old Chinese Tributary system- except again, there is an actual guarantee of protection (which the Chinese never gave to its tributes.) People are saying China won’t become the next superpower because of demographics because the one nation that has hit the demographic cliff is Japan, which people also believed would become a superpower. Europe is also hitting a demographic cliff, and is part of the reason it has become a complete nightmare with slow growth (especially in the periphery). But more to the point, any nation with a massive retiree population has to spend money on retirees that they can’t spend anywhere else. China has a probable birth rate near 1-1.2, which is amongst the lowest in the world due to the one-child policy. And China’s economy is horrifically dependant on investment (look up % of GDP by composition), causing the debt rate and real estate prices to spiral out of control (if you think prices in San Fran or Vancouver are bad, remember the price- to wages ratio is similar- but averaged across the entire country - Good luck getting an apartment in Beijing) and MUST run out of steam because their population is already mostly urbanized (60%, vs US 80%)- and the law of diminishing returns applies. Also, if you want another reason, it’s because people don’t WANT a Chinese- dominated world. Ask India or Japan or Vietnam. For several reasons.
    2
  719. 2
  720. 2
  721. 2
  722. 2
  723. 2
  724. 2
  725. 2
  726. 2
  727. 2
  728. 2
  729. 2
  730. 2
  731. 2
  732. 2
  733. 2
  734. 2
  735. 2
  736. 2
  737. 2
  738. 2
  739. 2
  740. 2
  741. 2
  742. 2
  743. 2
  744. 2
  745. 2
  746. 2
  747. 2
  748. 2
  749. 2
  750. 2
  751. 2
  752. 2
  753. 2
  754. 2
  755. 2
  756. 2
  757. 2
  758. 2
  759. 2
  760. 2
  761. 2
  762. 2
  763. 2
  764. 2
  765. 2
  766. 2
  767. 2
  768. 2
  769. 2
  770. 2
  771. 2
  772. 2
  773. 2
  774. 2
  775. 2
  776. 2
  777. 2
  778. 2
  779. 2
  780. 2
  781. 2
  782. 2
  783. 2
  784. 2
  785. 2
  786. 2
  787. 2
  788. 2
  789. 2
  790. 2
  791. 2
  792. 2
  793. 2
  794. 2
  795. 2
  796. 2
  797. 2
  798. 2
  799. 2
  800. 2
  801. 2
  802. 2
  803. 2
  804. 2
  805. 2
  806. 2
  807. 2
  808. 2
  809. 2
  810. 2
  811. 2
  812. 2
  813. 2
  814. 2
  815. 2
  816. 2
  817. 2
  818. 2
  819. 2
  820. 2
  821. 2
  822. 2
  823. 2
  824. 2
  825. 2
  826. 2
  827. 2
  828. 2
  829. 2
  830. 2
  831. 2
  832. 2
  833. 2
  834. 2
  835. 2
  836. 2
  837. 2
  838. 2
  839. 2
  840. 2
  841. 2
  842. 2
  843. 2
  844. 2
  845. 2
  846. 2
  847. 2
  848. 2
  849. 2
  850. 2
  851. 2
  852.  @harshjain3122  Thanks. 1. I don’t doubt the US could keep forces in the Middle East if they wanted to- the issue is that there’s no obvious reason to. Afghanistan survived so so long because it was a base against the terrorist-infested region. Arguably, the garrison (which was indeed a garrison, it was well below 10,000 men even before peace negotiations began, which is the size of a large US garrison, like Thule) was useful enough to keep, but… too late now. Oil is not a good reason to now either. The US also never was very involved in Africa. The thing is that it probably won’t matter until as such Turkey or Iran start to become major powers, or India becomes a larger threat than China. The only other theoretical currency competitor is crypto, and it won’t matter if it is forced to go underground because every major economy put massive restrictions on it. Gold has existed as an option since Nixon went off the Gold Standard. If people wanted to trade solely in Gold, they’ve had almost 50 years to do so. Yuan… That’s like going from fighting a bear to taking a dunk in lava. Getting money into China is easy. Getting money out of China… is harder. Especially nowadays. 2. https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/manufacturing-production https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/manufacturing-pmi Note the comparison between 2008, 2000, and today. This is despite inflation panic and mass supply shortages. Most stuff that made sense to outsource (textiles, etc.) were already outsourced long ago. Also, the decline of US manufacturing accelerated enormously after 2001…at the same time China joined the WTO. This appears to be unique to China, as things like NAFTA (1994) have little correlation with a sustained pattern of decline. This is consistent with many studies on the subject-China is infamous for effectively product dumping things like steel (which makes no sense to outsource, it’s heavy AF and low value/ton) onto the global market. The reversal should reverse the previous trend…in theory.
    2
  853. 2
  854. 2
  855. 2
  856. 2
  857. 2
  858. 2
  859. 2
  860. 2
  861. 2
  862. 2
  863. Jackson Wu Well, people could conceivably hire more landscapers to take care of their yards, considering that’s not that common. You could make the same argument with other sectors. How much food do people really need? Who is mandating these jobs? Why are they being paid when they’re unproductive? Now, *mind you*, there are definitely cases where this does happen, or people are made to work longer than they should or need to because it seems it would improve profits when it doesn’t. This isn’t a stable state though, and eventually changes because the market self-corrects because people find out those positions aren’t needed or hours can be reduced without losing production. (see: Adoption of 4-Day workweek) But for the most part, if you’re able to find someone to pay for something, it may be useless from a certain perspective, but it’s probably not, because people are clearly *paying for it*, because they want it. For example, Christmas trees are kind of useless from a practical perspective, but it’s a Billion-Dollar Industry. Most supplements and beauty products are useless. And yet people pay for that shit. A lot. Nothing is useless from an economic perspective if there is organic demand for it. Jobs are not ‘made up’ for no reason. They are satisfying actual demand. If I could get people to buy trash off me for a cent per ton, and there was demand for it, the jobs that are created selling trash are no less fake than that of farming food. If I wasn’t selling trash, that demand would go unfulfilled. Would it seriously negatively impact the people who didn’t get the trash? No, probably not. But that doesn’t matter. The entire economy is honestly ‘made up’. The entire concept of money is an abstract thing that doesn’t actually exist except in our minds. Bills aren’t money. They’re paper. What people want to trade the paper for depends on the people who hold them. And them moving that paper around is fundamentally what drives the economy and creates jobs. But that raises the question of what you would use to define productivity if profit isn’t it? The two primary drivers of technology through history are self-interest to generate profit, and war.
    2
  864. Jackson Wu Thing is that ‘increased consumption’ often involves the increase in demand for old jobs- like Horticulture, which has really taken off in recent years due to increased consumption and is difficult to automate. Construction is also not all that easy to automate either, and people wanting bigger houses and more kids if they have more money isn’t hard to imagine (it’s actually kind of a trend). Modular Construction has existed for years and will honestly likely never become mainstream. People just don’t like them, and they’re not flexible. Psychology is also a difficult field to automate, and is becoming more prevalent as a consequence of technology (not exactly for good reasons, but...) There is a reason we all still have jobs despite eliminating so many already. Also, demographics means that the labour pool of most industrial nations will shrink or stagnate, meaning consumption will increase as there are fewer people to work... we’ve seen this before in Japan, and the net result, despite high levels of automation isn’t no jobs, it’s the reverse. Unemployment rarely goes above 5% despite being in a recession for over 2 decades. Any serious loss of jobs are counteracting the lack of workforce available in the first place. The biggest threat for jobs may actually be in the third world, where wages increasingly matter more vs education and infrastructure. People in the First World have much more flexibility in getting and creating new jobs. If a factory can produce shorts cheaper than any wage worker, but needs to have educated engineers behind the scenes, the former isn’t going to get a job. And they have no consumer base to back into. This is already happening in the textile industry. https://youtu.be/OsSDI8wWAyQ —— With the last one, we really have no idea what we should do if no jobs exist. There is no real precedent, and the ones we kind of have (communities where everyone is on welfare and unemployed) are... not promising. I don’t believe we can decouple work from that innate human need. Human Psychology ingrained over eons of evolution can’t be reversed in a couple decades. Science has yet to find a way to actually fulfill a psychological need with a pill or some other substitute. The primary ways to deal with a psychological problem right now are dealing with its effects and fulfilling the need that isn’t being met. We aren’t going to solve the problem on the first try- or solve it by theory anyways. Historically, the most likely option is the natural one- Darwinianism - until we find the right solution. Meaning pain. Lots of pain. I personally think that we’re ultimately never going to create many intelligent/sentient AI, and that technology will eventually stagnate. That effectively means there will still be a decent number of jobs around, and we don’t have to deal with the AI can of worms. That’s not really make-work, just normal work. Solving the problem by never entering the problem to begin with.
    2
  865. 2
  866. 2
  867. 2
  868. 2
  869. 2
  870. 2
  871. 2
  872. 2
  873. 2
  874. 2
  875. 2
  876. 2
  877. 2
  878. 2
  879. 2
  880. 2
  881. 2
  882. 2
  883. 2
  884. 2
  885. 2
  886.  StrategicFooyoo  China needs foreign currency (like any nation without a hard currency), and they’ve got that from exports and debt. Exports to the rest of the world collapse due to trade sanctions, and all of a sudden foreign currency debt levels explode, or the Chinese starve. (They have to import food to feed themselves despite using excessive inputs of pesticide and fertilizer, causing water pollution to get even worse.) Chinese foreign currency debt is 2 trillion. Or 13% of GDP. Most Western nations are inherently considered hard currencies and are trusted in international trade. Unlike the Yuan. The USA negotiating with the Fed is not necessarily default. Also, note that the president can appoint the Fed Chairman. Also, note that the reason the Fed doesn’t directly fund the US government has to do with legal handicaps the Federal Government gave the Federal Reserve*. It’s currently *illegal for the Fed to print money and just give it to the government (effectively being the same as a US Treasury banknote). Also, note every developed economy is attempting to fight *deflation* due to the baby boomer retirees. Instead of the inflation being pumped into QE, some could be given directly to the government. Also note that implementing a 5% VAT could raise $355 billion/year (excluding rebates, adding rebates would likely increase the real rate to something like 7%). https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/0721_vat_for_us_gale.pdf A Carbon Tax would raise ~$250 billion/year. That would cut the deficit by 2/3rds. Both are supported by economists as good ways to reduce the deficit ASAP. Both could easily be implemented by a competent Democratic Administration (like the Clinton Administration did in the 90s). The reason the deficit is so high is the inability for Republicans to actually cut spending. Few nations have ‘funded’ its future liabilities. Not Canada. Not the EU. Not Japan. Not China. Not Russia. Literally every country WITH pensions has massive unfounded liabilities. https://www.weforum.org/press/2017/05/global-pension-timebomb-funding-gap-set-to-dwarf-world-gdp China in particular is nearly as bad as the US. If the US is fucked, so is everyone else. Assuming the CCP isn’t sacked after being in the world to the brink of a nuclear war? The biggest issue with ANY nuclear tactical use is that it risks easily turning into a nuclear war. China attacks American boats with nukes, the US retaliates by nuking Chinese shipyards and naval bases. The Chinese retaliate by attacking US cities, because they think those shipyards were too close to population centres or because hitting land was a red line. Then the world ends. There’s the other thing that if a world war actually started and tactical nuclear weapons became a risk, the US military would dust off SDI’s Brilliant Pebbles (which was actually somewhat affordable- a couple hundred billion), which would give the US all the leverage in a nuclear exchange. It hasn’t happened yet because that hasn’t been a threat since the USSR collapsed. Launch and satellite costs have also fallen since the 80s. Of course, so could China. But then, neither side can effectively use nuclear missiles to gain an advantage on each other.
    2
  887. StrategicFooyoo 1. China is a developing nation with less ability to pay. Absolute Debt does not matter, only relative debt. If I make $1000 a month and am in debt $10,000, I can probably pay it off. If I make $100 a month and am in debt $10,000, I’m screwed. Assuming you trust official public & private debt and GDP figures, China’s facing a financial crisis. If you don’t, they’re facing economic collapse. The US already had a financial crisis, and public&private debt-to-GDP has been on the decline since. Also, much of their debt is denominated in foreign currency. “Unfounded liabilities” are not debt. They’re designated future possible debt that would materialize if the US Government can’t find more money (taxes) cut benefits, or cut interest (ie. asking the Fed for money without going through the bond market, allowing for the direct printing of money). 2. China nukes US ships. Then what? You’ve basically set a precedent where the USA can now nuke all Chinese Naval bases (and ships), thus making the maneuver pointless. You’re still trapped. Geography also dooms it, because unless you also take out all American military bases in the 1st Island Chain, China, air power can also be used to interrupt shipping. That’s still not a guarantee, because you can use pretty much any flat, empty strip that’s long enough as an air strip. This discounts drone warfare, and the fact that US foreign and trade policy is in a state of disorganized, self-injuring flux as it reorganizes against China. That assumes the USA hasn’t already destroyed all those naval and coastal air bases, which tends to happen in a naval war.
    2
  888. 2
  889. 2
  890. 2
  891. 2
  892. 2
  893. 2
  894. 2
  895. 2
  896. 2
  897. 2
  898. 2
  899. 2
  900. 2
  901. 2
  902. 2
  903. Aran Butcher The Americans basically started funding the opposite side in the Mexican Campaign literally right after the Civil War. The French saw where things were going and gave up despite nearly conquering all of Mexico. It’s not even good for the French on the long run, the Americans, British and Germans can start a multi-front war against France in WW1. Remember who was in charge of foreign relations in Germany at the time. North and Northeastern Brazil are mostly multiracial, not Black. They had plenty of white settlers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilians They just mostly bred with Blacks and Natives. Which might end up happening here if they’re not being overly racist. Remember that they can’t use slavery in the late Victorian age and the Blacks were still fairly sparse. I was referring to places like Townsville. Not the most populous part of Australia, but not empty either. Remember that Australia had a fairly low number of migrants for its carrying capacity, so obviously everyone took the best land first. Libya and Eritrea are also as hot as West Africa, but had no issues finding Italian settlers. Libya is even worse because most of it is pretty marginal. Britain viewed France as a rival right up until Germany started being more of a threat. Maybe they could take Patagonia while Chile and Argentina were still disorganized, since it wasn’t actually under their control yet and thus the British may just let it slide. But it’s really only all that good for wool and has a population today of 2 million. South Island in NZ may also have been colonized if France was more organized. Which actually has good farmland, but it’s also tiny. It has only 1.16 million today, and even though it has an agricultural surplus, it can’t absorb all that many people. West Africa and the Sahel are breadbaskets if you have the infrastructure to support it.
    2
  904. 2
  905. 2
  906. 2
  907. 2
  908. 2
  909. 2
  910. 2
  911. 2
  912. 2
  913. 2
  914. 2
  915. 2
  916. 2
  917. 2
  918. 2
  919. 2
  920. 2
  921. 2
  922. 2
  923. 2
  924. 2
  925. 2
  926. People don't really talk much about this because it's a difficult problem to solve, and there's no comparable movement like there is for Climate Change. There are a few things we know should increase birth rates (of those that have been tried) that should be feasible: 1. Solve the Housing Crisis. Duh. 2. Encourage people to get married. No marriage = no kids. 3. Ban dating apps so people actually have to go outside to find partners instead of being swarmed by hundreds of date requests (really hard to find a mate when you're competing in such a giant pool and people only choose the top 10%. Dating apps also suck generally.) 4. Pension reform to increase pension benefits based on the number of children they have. Children used to be a financial insurance policy, and this will make pensions more stable on the long run. 5. Stop trying to push women into full-time work and increase work benefits/flexibility for working mothers like Scandinavia does. 6. Ban abortion. Probably the most politically difficult, at least in the states. Most abortions are elective- so the vast majority of 'saved' babies just never end up being born (and a disproportionate number of the remainder have genetic defects), but still. One thing to note though: This is one case where technology might change things dramatically in the form of life extension. Since tech CEOs and billionaires want to live forever, this is one field that gets tons of funding. It's probably not one technology, but multiple, and will be disseminated in rich nations first. That would change these dynamics dramatically.
    2
  927. 2
  928. 2
  929. 2
  930. 2
  931. 2
  932. 2
  933. 2
  934. 2
  935. 2
  936. 2
  937. 2
  938. 2
  939. 2
  940. I’m fairly certain space colonization is unlikely within the century. The costs, even under the most optimistic estimates (ie. Elon’s Starship ‘aspirational’ launch costs) are too high for any private company to justify or finance- and there’s not enough of a public push to allow it to happen (as seen by NASA’s generally inflation-adjusted stagnant budget.) For example, even assuming a $2M launch cost for the Starship, just launching 1 Million to Mars (incl. 3 cargo flights/100) costs $60B. Going by F9 costs/kg, and extrapolating it out to Starship, you get something like $9 Trillion. That’s a completely useless range of costs, but even if we saw current launch prices drop by 10x (even under the most optimistic estimates, SpaceX only ever accomplished 2-3x cost reductions- under pessimistic estimates, within 20%<), that’s still $900B. Only a handful of companies, even under an extremely bloated capital market, are valued higher than a trillion. A government could finance it- but that can only happen if there’s near unanimous support or someone with a ton of political clout, popularity, and competence like a HW Bush/LBJ/Reagan, to force it though (HW tried in OTL, but it was fairly half-hearted.) We’ve been waiting for a century at this point. There is also little need for the resources of space in any near-term scenario. We’re not even remotely close to being K-1, and over 80% of the Earth’s surface is basically unmined. Just the sunlight falling on the Sahara dwarfs current world energy consumption- let alone that falling on the Pacific. There’s also actually likely overproduction of foodstuffs in the Americas. The human population are more likely to decrease in the medium term before they start increasing again.
    2
  941. 2
  942. 2
  943. 2
  944. 2
  945. 2
  946. 2
  947. 2
  948. 2
  949. 2
  950. 2
  951. 2
  952. 2
  953. 2
  954. 2
  955. 2
  956. 2
  957. 2
  958. 2
  959. 2
  960. 2
  961. 2
  962. 2
  963. 2
  964. 2
  965. 2
  966. 2
  967. 2
  968. 2
  969. 2
  970. 2
  971. 2
  972. 2
  973. 2
  974. 2
  975. 2
  976. 2
  977. 2
  978. 2
  979. 2
  980. 2
  981. 2
  982. 2
  983. 2
  984. 2
  985. 2
  986. 2
  987. 2
  988. 2
  989. 2
  990. 2
  991. 2
  992. 2
  993. 2
  994. 2
  995. 2
  996. 2
  997. 2
  998. 2
  999. 2
  1000. 2
  1001. 2
  1002. 2
  1003. 2
  1004. 2
  1005. 2
  1006. 2
  1007. 2
  1008. 2
  1009. 2
  1010. 2
  1011. 2
  1012. 2
  1013. 2
  1014. 2
  1015. 2
  1016. 1
  1017. 1
  1018. 1
  1019. 1
  1020. 1
  1021. 1
  1022. 1
  1023. 1
  1024. 1
  1025. 1
  1026. 1
  1027. 1
  1028. 1
  1029. 1
  1030. 1
  1031. 1
  1032. 1
  1033. 1
  1034. 1
  1035. 1
  1036. 1
  1037. 1
  1038. 1
  1039. 1
  1040. 1
  1041. 1
  1042. 1
  1043. 1
  1044. 1
  1045. 1
  1046. 1
  1047. 1
  1048. 1
  1049. 1
  1050. 1
  1051. 1
  1052. 1
  1053. 1
  1054. 1
  1055. 1
  1056. 1
  1057. 1
  1058. 1
  1059. 1
  1060. 1
  1061. 1
  1062. 1
  1063. 1
  1064. 1
  1065. Incredulous I didn't say there was no concensous, I said we don't KNOW the concencous... geez. "That does not mean that GHG emissions drive climate change. It's possible that variations in Earth's orbital distance (i.e. Milankovitch cycles) drive the climate ENTIRELY, with GHG emissions having ZERO effect. It's up to scientists to prove which one it is. Why were the temps on Earth in the distant past higher than today, with NO man-made emissions? Natural GHG emissions, orbital variations and (possibly) sun activity." The fuck is the difference between man and natural GHGs? They are the same gases, CO2, CH4, etc... You said GHGs don't drive climate change, but you contridicted yourself. Also, the variations in Earth's Orbital distance are counted in the Sun's heat load... It's still higher than it should be. And the temperature of Earth being higher in the distant past is soomething completely different, and would not be possible if it was only the Sun's fault, and the Earth was in teh same orbital distance. Look: "Young Sun Paradox". " >"it would overturn decades of climate and Earth science" No. Milankovitch cycles and their influence on climate have been known since 1920s." Bullshit, those cycles have to do with the interglacial and ice age cycles. WE should be ebbing into an ice age right now because of this- the opposite is actually happening right now. That fact is also why there was the global cooling panic in the past. Not anymore. ">"Doesn't mean the science behind it is not true." Child, stop shifting the burden of proof. It's up to IPCC etc to prove their claims. Political agreement to implement the costly policies proposed by supporters requires a HARD proof. It's yet to be presented. "Doesn't mean it's not true" is not a proof." except there IS HARD PROOF. IPCC is not the only organisation. For example, NASA. If it was just political, it should have been denying climate change when Bush was in office... http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/ https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php Climate change being fake and climate change being overestimated are two different things...
    1
  1066. 1
  1067. 1
  1068. 1
  1069. 1
  1070. 1
  1071. 1
  1072. 1
  1073. 1
  1074. 1
  1075. 1
  1076. 1
  1077. 1
  1078. 1
  1079. 1
  1080. 1
  1081. 1
  1082. 1
  1083. 1
  1084. 1
  1085. 1
  1086. 1
  1087. 1
  1088. 1
  1089. 1
  1090. 1
  1091. 1
  1092. 1
  1093. 1
  1094. 1
  1095. 1
  1096. 1
  1097. 1
  1098. 1
  1099. 1
  1100. 1
  1101. 1
  1102. 1
  1103. 1
  1104. 1
  1105. 1
  1106. 1
  1107. 1
  1108. 1
  1109. 1
  1110. 1
  1111. 1
  1112. 1
  1113. 1
  1114. 1
  1115. 1
  1116. 1
  1117. 1
  1118. 1
  1119. 1
  1120. 1
  1121. 1
  1122. 1
  1123. 1
  1124. 1
  1125. 1
  1126. 1
  1127. 1
  1128. 1
  1129. 1
  1130. 1
  1131. 1
  1132. 1
  1133. 1
  1134. 1
  1135. 1
  1136. 1
  1137. 1
  1138. 1
  1139. 1
  1140. 1
  1141. 1
  1142. 1
  1143. 1
  1144. 1
  1145. 1
  1146. 1
  1147. 1
  1148. 1
  1149. 1
  1150. 1
  1151. 1
  1152. 1
  1153. 1
  1154. 1
  1155. 1
  1156. 1
  1157. 1
  1158. 1
  1159. 1
  1160. 1
  1161. 1
  1162. 1
  1163. 1
  1164. 1
  1165. 1
  1166. 1
  1167. 1
  1168. 1
  1169. 1
  1170. 1
  1171. 1
  1172. 1
  1173. 1
  1174. 1
  1175. 1
  1176. 1
  1177. 1
  1178. 1
  1179. 1
  1180. 1
  1181. 1
  1182. 1
  1183. 1
  1184. ​ @johnwilson6324  Fought by the US. Should the US, in your view, have spent so much effort to stop the spread of Communism? I think Reagan said it best: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUQm7UqF-YA And anyways, sorry for the long wait, I was busy. I'll respond to your previous comment properly now: "China doesn't want to invade Okinawa. That's fake news. One 2 star General said "Okinawa shouldn't necessarily be Japanese or Chinese"." It wasn't just the 2 star general. State-run media and Chinese historians (also controlled by the government) ran with it afterwards. The CCP didn't do anything to stop it. And 'questioning' the sovereignty is... being controlled by China. Even if just as a vassal state, which is what is implied in context. https://www.dw.com/en/japan-angered-by-chinas-claim-to-all-of-okinawa/a-16803117 Imagine if tomorrow, PBS said that Newfoundland shouldn't belong to Canada? That's a land claim, all right. There's more claims: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FR7WgKnBTIE That link details the links between genetics and IQ passed down over *family*, which is different than 'IQ differential between races is caused by genetics'. Argentina IS white. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_Latin_America#Genetic_studies "A 2009 autosomal DNA study found that of the total Argentine population, 78.5 percent of the national genepool was European, 17.3 percent Native American, and 4.2 percent African.[62]" https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d7/Percentage_of_major_Y-DNA_haplogroups_in_Europe.png Greeks are comparably white. If they're 'white', so are the Argentines. No, if it's a white genocide, it's also a genocide of those minorities. Also, not sure if you know, but people have been mixing races for as long as trade and war has existed. It's not new. We can see the traces in the gene pool of different peoples. And history has shown you can have stable societies with multiple distinct ethnic and genetic identities (Switzerland, China, Iran) if you integrate them properly into your greater national identity and don't treat them like shit. The US, despite all the shit over police racism and BLM protests, honestly has its disparate peoples get along pretty well overall in the grand scheme of things. "Africa has WAY better infrastructure than China." [Citation needed] I can't even read that imgur link properly. See, here's the problem. Immigration is not an 'invasion'. There is a reason waterboarding is considered torture and drinking water from a water bottle is not. What matters is the people or society in control of the situation, and the voluntarism of the people immigrating. And invasion is forceful. Immigration isn't. And the thing is, not even Trumpists are as anti-immigration/ethno-nationalist as you are (who generally want less immigration and higher 'quality' immigration). White Nationalists are a tiny minority in American society. You don't get to dictate policy for the rest of the country.
    1
  1185. 1
  1186.  @johnwilson6324  https://nationalinterest.org/feature/china-claiming-okinawa-japan-claiming-hawaii-15996 https://www.dw.com/en/japan-angered-by-chinas-claim-to-all-of-okinawa/a-16803117 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arunachal_Pradesh Both have about 1.4 million. You could literally have done a Google Search. When was the last time the US used a military base as a platform to annex land? I’ll tell you why you should care. The first move China would make against India in a war is to close off their water supply. Millions begin to starve, beginning a mass exodus to the West. The first move China would make against Japan or Taiwan is to attack their shipping. If they can’t hold off the attacks, millions starve, and those who can start moving to the West. Then what happens when they arrive? You send them back to starve in a war zone? Do you send them into ghettos until the war ends, and they have to move back under a hostile foreign power, or to a home that’s rubble and cobblestone? https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2019/08/14/statistics-show-iq-disparities-between-races-heres-what-that-really-means/ The idea that races solely determine economic success is ridiculous. Especially considering the relative economic success of Hispanic Americans over their counterparts still in Latin America. I guess we need to send back all the Blacks too? Asians? Indians? Maybe the Jews and Italians while you’re at it? You DO realize that’s ethnic cleansing, right? And when those happened, *millions died*. I wish that the Germans could have been let to stay in Silesia and the Greeks could have been let to stay in Constantinople, areas they had been living in for over a millennia. Especially the latter. ‘Istanbul’ my ass. They by no means were inevitable. The Germans were let to stay in Alsace after being ceded to France. If the Allies made it to Berlin, they would have saved the Silesian Germans. If a ethnonationalism never took hold in Turkey, the Armenians and Greeks would still be there. EVERY Chinese leader since Mao has publicly stated they want to annex Taiwan, if force if necessary. You don’t say that if you don’t take your territorial claims seriously. Russia has invaded Crimea and is in the process of ousting the current dictator of Belarus so he can get a more compliant person willing to ‘reunite’ it with Russia (look up Union State). The GINI coefficient of CA, a measure of inequality, is 0.49. Literally US average. What? Argentina is basically white and has an IQ of 93, and it is... well... Argentina is the only nation to have ever gone backwards from developed to developing status. Not even Greece did that. Africa never had much infrastructure. Note that infrastructure is more than just roads and bridges, but schools and hospitals as well. Plus, Africa’s geography is terrible, and requires more infrastructure to get anything done (it’s mostly plateaus that go all the way to the coast and no navigable rivers, with a few exceptions (West Africa comes to mind). Look, I consider myself a right-winger. I’m not for free borders. But what do you think would have happened if America let the Soviets do what they pleased during the last Cold War?
    1
  1187. 1
  1188. 1
  1189. 1
  1190. 1
  1191.  StrategicFooyoo  Most companies have already been moving supply chains out of China for South Asia and Latin America due to labour costs now reaching parity with the US, adjusted for productivity. The Made in China 2025 plan was a plan to mitigate that, but it was basically dead on arrival. They really should have kept something like that more secret. The Chinese Internal Market is not that big: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_consumer_markets) and is highly protected and skewed towards domestic companies, making keeping factories there to service the Chinese Market pretty iffy. If I want to put my conspiratorial hat on, it's part of the reason MSM and Soros has no problem pissing on the Chinese now. Everyone has sucked most of the Gold out of the China mine, and now everyone's fine with shutting the mine down. It's likely actually closer to $400 mil: http://www.worldstopexports.com/chinas-top-10-imports/ And as I said earlier, Made in China 2025 was dead on arrival. Also, how does China maintain its high-tech manufacturing base without imports of integrated circuits? China really hurts badly economically if it has to ration out its FOREX, even if it can keep the lights on. And without exports, no money is coming in, either. China is an export nation, meaning the net is a loss in FOREX. Remember that China doesn't have to collapse entirely to stop being a threat. A Lost Decade or 2 is sufficient, due to demographics. Note that Japan was able to mitigate the problems with demographics by tapping the global investment and consumer marketplace, and increasing the level of outsourcing to minimize labour use while maximizing corporate profits and GDP. China likely lacks that luxury. Being on the neutral/good side of most nations that matter has its perks. Depends on why there is a slowdown in trade. If it's the economy, then sure. If it's the fact people aren't able to trade much anymore for whatever reason (say, a Iran-Saudi War), the result is a mass INFLATION of the cost of Oil, not deflation.
    1
  1192. 1
  1193. 1
  1194. 1
  1195. 1
  1196. 1
  1197. 1
  1198. 1
  1199. 1
  1200. 1
  1201. 1
  1202. 1
  1203. 1
  1204. 1
  1205. 1
  1206. 1
  1207. 1
  1208. 1
  1209. 1
  1210. 1
  1211. 1
  1212. 1
  1213. 1
  1214. 1
  1215. 1
  1216. 1
  1217. 1
  1218. 1
  1219. 1
  1220. 1
  1221. Ivan the Great 2.0 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_gun “Acceleration: For a space gun with a gun barrel of length ( l l), and the needed velocity ( v e v_{e}), the acceleration ( a a) is provided by the following formula:[citation needed] a = v e 2 2 l a={\frac {v_{e}^{2}}{2l}} For instance, with a space gun with a vertical "gun barrel" through both the Earth's crust and the troposphere, totalling ~60 km (37 miles) of length ( l l), and a velocity ( v e v_{e}) enough to escape the Earth's gravity (escape velocity, which is 11.2 km/s or 25,000 mph on Earth), the acceleration ( a a) would theoretically be more than 1,000 m/s2 (3,300 ft/s2), which is more than 100 g-forces, which is about 3 times the human tolerance to g-forces of maximum 20 to 35 g[5] during the ~10 seconds such a firing would take.” Aka: To say it’d need to be big is an understatement . Doesn’t matter either way, you still need rockets to circularize an orbit, and liquid fuel rockets had yet to exist. Even the Apollo astronauts used computers most of the time to help with or pilot spacecraft and rockets as well. So good freaking luck . Same thing with building rockets on the Moon to get back. Doesn’t matter, the British still got a serious bloody nose from the Boers- who actually won on the long term anyways since they ended up taking over South Africa. It was still going on at the turn of the century. Point is that the European powers were, frankly, busy, even at the turn of the century. You have to at least butterfly away WW1, and keep Germany (and possibly Italy and France) focused on overseas colonies. And even then, there was still the Middle East and East Asia left to partition up. The Americas if the USA or Britain can’t be bothered to stop an invasion there. AltHistHub made a video on the habitable Moon though.
    1
  1222. 1
  1223. 1
  1224. TapOnX https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/25766/what-would-happen-if-the-polar-ice-caps-of-mars-melted Mars lacks enough water stored to form more than Titan-Style seas, assuming enough CO2 could even be sublimated to make it moderately stable, and that a singular asteroid impact would be sufficient. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_on_Mars “More than 21 million km3 of ice have been detected at or near the surface of Mars, enough to cover the whole planet to a depth of 35 meters (115 ft).[13] Even more ice is likely to be locked away in the deep subsurface.[14]” For comparison, the average depth of Earth’s oceans is 3.2 km. Either way, you get a desert that can’t be breathed in properly with barely any water. That is also likely toxic due to perchlorate. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7b/Estimated_extent_of_the_Solar_Systems_habitable_zone.png This is basically the problem. Mars is outside the ‘normal’ habitable zone most of the time, but is in the ‘extended’ habitable zone, where you can have super-earths, desert planets, or extreme Venus-like cloud planets be habitable (how you get all that atmosphere on Mars being a mystery). But not Earth-like planets. Basically you need either a very low albedo or an extreme amount of GHGs. Maybe you could merge Venus and Mars into one entity, but that’s still only 93% of Earth’s mass. Maybe we can move Jupiter a bit further back to get more mass. The V3 cannon existed in WW2. It couldn’t be aimed at new targets, so it was pretty bad as a weapon overall.
    1
  1225. 1
  1226. 1
  1227. 1
  1228. 1
  1229. 1
  1230. 1
  1231. 1
  1232. 1
  1233. 1
  1234. 1
  1235. 1
  1236. 1
  1237. 1
  1238. 1
  1239. 1
  1240. 1
  1241. 1
  1242. 1
  1243. 1
  1244. 1
  1245. 1
  1246. 1
  1247. 1
  1248. 1
  1249. 1
  1250. 1
  1251. 1
  1252. 1
  1253. 1
  1254. 1
  1255. 1
  1256. 1
  1257. 1
  1258. 1
  1259. 1
  1260. 1
  1261. 1
  1262. 1
  1263. 1
  1264. 1
  1265. 1
  1266. 1
  1267. 1
  1268. 1
  1269. 1
  1270. 1
  1271. 1
  1272. 1