Comments by "HomerOJSimpson" (@Homer-OJ-Simpson) on "TLDR News EU" channel.

  1.  @SuperSampling  "By your reasoning, China should rule the world. They never invaded anyone," How do you think they got so big? People just joined? They invaded a lot. And they made v@ss@ls of many as well. And in 1979 inv Vietnam to defend Pol Pot. >The list of unjust conflicts the US was involved in since the end of World War 2 feels endless. Out of curioisity, do you tihnk the world would be better if USSR spread more into Europe and had more v@ss@al states around the world and more countries became communist? I'm not defending every single conflict but your post argues the US made the world worse which would suggest you think the world would be better under a USSR and communist world.
    2
  2.  @ataytaygaraev4298  it’s almost as worker of Moscow didn’t actually read what OP said. Ruzzians.
    2
  3. Russia still a superpower but can’t beat a poor weak country that didn’t even have an army 8 years ago. 20,000 Russian troop deaths in 3 months. At this pace it’s going to be nearly 100,000 russian troop deaths in about a year. Slava Ukraini
    2
  4.  @trashtrashisfree  Yes, that's why Russia has a time limit for the war. It could be 2 years or 5 years but I can't imagine they can go beyond that before the economy collapses. Ukraine has a similar concern, but it's regards to getting continued support.
    2
  5. So why would individual countries in NATO in Europe want to build up their own military by a significant amount? Wouldn’t it be easier and cheaper to build up NATO military in Europe?
    2
  6.  @mysterioanonymous3206  But Switzerland has put a lot less focus on defense over the years. It's not needed as much considering they are surrounded by allies who have no intention of ever invading Switzerland. "historically we've been surrounded by hostile nation". Yes, and proportionate to the era, Swiss spent a lot more defense during that time.
    2
  7. @lemonz, Very well put. I think that's an excellent point that illustrates that Turkey is no where near being allowed in EU as they currently are a danger. They have learned from Hungary and lesser extent Poland.
    2
  8.  @cageybee7221  " no-one wants to loan money and have it forgiven, t" Except when it's governments doing it to help an ally....which is exactly what's happening. that's why only government/political entities are loaning Ukraine money.
    2
  9. If Putin doesn’t attack Finland, it means Putin lied that a primary reason he invaded Ukraine is because he didn’t want NATO at his border. If one argues that Putin did indeed attack Ukraine because of NATO concerns but can’t attack Finland because the Ukraine invasion didn’t go well, well it just proves Putin already lost the war. The purpose was to prevent expansion of NATO but instead it led to further expansion and a more unified stronger NATO. It’s clear to me the reason to invade Ukraine was all about a land grab and wanting control of the former Soviet state because he wants to recreate the Russian empire
    2
  10. They slaughtered some names that were in Spanish in the past and I thought "But spanish isn't that different to English compared to Slavic or Asian laguages".
    2
  11. I agree. And i don’t think the weapons they send is the big problem — it’s what diplomatic off ramp to provide Putin, if any.
    2
  12. Almost everything said about Hungary in this video is also true or Poland. the difference is Hungary’s president is very pro Putin and Poland is not.
    2
  13. It was a huge mistake to depend on Russia this much. They had since at least 2014 to do something about it.
    2
  14.  @jacob4920  Yes! The I said the same elsewhere that it's similar to how Turkey acts with NATO. They seem to make bad decisions purely to keep some autonomy.
    2
  15.  @johndoe-cd9vt  Then you can easily point out what's made up. Either way, it's a contradiction. He wants the world to help with RU but says that Europe should keep out of others affairs.
    2
  16.  @sueyourself5413  I think the racism is from people like you saying this is racist. You use the same technique as the see see pee in Beijing — call it racism if people have an issue with a government. Turkey isn’t holding up to many of the obligations and seems to want to support Russia. Turkeys president has made himself a Putn like dictatorship so I don’t expect much from Turkey anymore
    1
  17.  @sandoristar7597  looked at Sue Yourself other comment and it seems to be a pro Russia account trying to sow discord in NATO
    1
  18.  @deezeed2817  I think its matter of what the definition of 'decouple'. I don't see that as complete removal of all trade with a trading partner, just reducing trade. Besides the problems of making china wealthier just so it can use that against the west, the other problem is the unfair conditions. China heavily subsidizes many industries and makes it difficult for foreign competition to enter the market while the west doesn't do that anywhere to the degree China does.
    1
  19. Interesting. So always part of the policy but also not completely neutral in that humanitarian aid might only go to one side.
    1
  20.  @LizardSpork  "There's a tendency for capitalists to think that trade will prevent war.' It works ONLY if the other nation you're trying to change relies heavily on that trade. But if that other country is very natural resource rich, they can sell their resources to anyone. Or if they are very big market like China or India, they know you will need their trade. But Eastern Europe is a great example of it working.
    1
  21.  @LizardSpork  > I never said "stop trading", I said "trade does not prevent war". Maybe the fact you worded your original comment in a way that is more of a strawman might be the problem. Those 'capitalist' don't say it will ALWAYS prevent war. What it does is highly reduce war. > it's not just trade that brought peace to Europe, Europe had plenty of trade just prior to WW1, Actually, trade between nations were very minimal before WW2 relative to trade afterwards. Trade actually helps foster closer relations as well, which you didn't mention. Before Ch1na went a bit crazy starting 2020, a lot of the world had at least somewhat positive opinion of China. It was only starting in 2020 for the reasons mentioned in this video that they started seeing their favorability numbers drop. " liberal democracies don't war against each other." is a given and cannot be changed from the outside, but trade is something that one country can do with another that greatly reduces trade.
    1
  22.  @oskars1419  Yeah, not like China is tampering in elections in Europe nor have secret police stations in Europe, right?
    1
  23.  @oskars1419  Yeah, not like China is tampering in elections in Europe nor have secret police stations in Europe, right?
    1
  24.  @LizardSpork  Germany's largest trade partners may have been those countries -- but international trade was a much smaller part of their economy than post WW2. The world was not that globalized. If it was already as high as after WW2, then the powers wouldn't have created a globalized trade system to promote more trade if it already was exceptionally high.
    1
  25.  @LizardSpork  "What does lack of globalisation have to do" Literally means that international trade was no where near as big as it would later become. You are aware of that, right? This isn't rocket science -- it's well established that trade has increased a lot over the years and that before economies were much more domestic oriented. > not something that guarantees peace. and like I said, you keep creating this strawman. It INCREASES the chances of peace. Or, it REDUCES the chances of war.
    1
  26.  @LizardSpork  lots of things increas chances of peace and trade is one that increases peace the most that can be done from the outside rather. Liberal democracy comes from within — but trade certainly helped Eastern Europe became mostly liberal democracy. Same with Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, etc. I didn’t say you said trade doesn’t increase peace. I said you created a strawman by saying “capitalist say trade prevents war”.
    1
  27.  @LizardSpork  Those are some extreme positions from a few. You're saying that a few people saying that means that you can apply to all capitalist? And people often use hyperbolic language to emphasize a point.
    1
  28.  @LizardSpork  And just to illustrate my point of you taking things out of context, here is more on Thomas Friedeman that should end this conversation: - Thomas Friedman also warns that the Dell theory should not be interpreted as a guarantee that nations that are deeply involved in global supply chains will not go to war with each other.* It means, rather, that the governments of those nations and their citizens will have very heavy economic costs to consider as they contemplate the possibility of war. Such costs include long-term loss of the country's profitable participation in the global supply chain.
    1
  29.  @LizardSpork  Yeah, except you did a blanket statement on a whole group when it was a small subset of them. So you made 1% apply to 100% of capitalist..and that 1% didn't even say it 100% eliminates chance of war.
    1
  30.  @himanshusingh5214  almost every expert agrees a major reason China doesn’t fully support Russia (by providing weapons) and doesn’t invade Taiwan is the impact it will have to Chinas economy. So trade doesn’t 100% guarantee peace but it does greatly reduce chances of war.
    1
  31.  @hcaslanO  a Kurd defending turkey’s oppression of Kurds and a subscriber to Jordan Peterson. Ok, sure
    1
  32. Great analysis. Considering they don't have enough weapons and supplies for the soliders, I don't expect a general mobilization anytime soon. I guess if they did do one it would be purely to get many industries to only build military weapons and supplies but with western sanctions, they will have trouble finding alternatives for the goods those factories were normally building.
    1
  33. EU doesn’t even need Hungary. Poland was a problem but Poland is on board with action against Russia while Hungary is anti EU and pro Putin.
    1
  34.  @locybapsi174  China hasn’t officially supported the invasion of Ukraine and yet….we know they support it.
    1
  35.  @locybapsi174  They supported the gen-cide of Kosovo by saying Serbia was not in the wrong for what happened and complaining about foreign intervention.
    1
  36.  @antoineaublin3812  "productivity has been rising while the worker/pensioner ratio decreased, so were still producing enough wealth even with less workers in proportion". But then this assumes that people are not materially improving their lives over those decades. HEAVILY flawed argument. A lot of that productivity gain went into people buying more stuff. By your logic, the payout of the pension should be the same as it was 40 years ago.
    1
  37.  @antoineaublin3812  I Just highlighted a major issue with your argument. I didn’t say you said the whole video was wrong.
    1
  38.  @JustPeterSteel  I’m confused. Are you saying that the more you make, the less you get in pension? That makes no sense. The US does cap how much anyone can get from social security so it doesn’t matter if you make $150k or $1,500k a year, you’ve hit the cap.
    1
  39.  @JustPeterSteel  one million euro/dollars is not that much these days. It's nice but you aren't living rich without a constant flow of high income. But either ways, 120k euro or dollars is not that much if you have a family and the spouse makes a lot less or doesn't work. It's a good amount if each makes 120k though. and many people only start making 120k late in their careers so it's not guaranteed they will have a lot of saved money.
    1
  40.  @johnsamuel1999  ' If you contribute more to the pension system, you deserve more pension amount to maintain your prior lifestyle. Its about fairness, the more you provide, the more you receive. " You must agree though that there is a cap on payout of a government pension, right? And many laws and policies are not about 'fairness' as you define it. it's about what is best for the people.
    1
  41.  @asusdvh7265  There are many problems with the OP (Antoine Aublin) using productivity gain. Productivity is measured by the number of hours worked by a population. If there are fewer workers and more retired people or if workers are working fewer hours, a productive increase might still result in lower GDP and lower tax revenues. And guess what, in 2000 France dropped the full time work hours from 39 hours to 35 hours. That means that an 11% increase in productivity and no other changes (same exact number of workers / retired) would be required to just get back to 2000 levels.
    1
  42.  @JustPeterSteel  what country are doing your math for? Are you factoring in that 120k after taxes is a fraction of that? I'm not sure exactly what it would it be in France but let's say it was 80k. That's only 5k per month. The house and all the bills cold be 3k. That leaves only 2k food, clothing, other bills, entertainment, etc. and that individual would have 2-3 kids.
    1
  43.  @johnsamuel1999  " yes I am aware that the government has both a minimum pension (which benefits lower income groups) and a maximum pension as well. But the person above want everyone to receive the SAME pension amount or lower income people to get more.'" I was looking at clarification from both of you and I think I got it. I certainly disagree with him on that specific argument there. " laws are not based on whats "best for the people", its based on what we want them to be " Same differences. Maybe I should reword it so that you can understand the point. Laws are based on what the people think is best for the people. At least in a democracy. So why are you talking about fairness or equal treatment of finances? The logic you used would suggest all welfare (or financial support to the poor) is wrong.
    1
  44. Don't put all your eggs in one basket.
    1
  45.  @jacksmith-mu3ee  see see pee talking points don’t make sense
    1
  46. Things don't look good for Russia's future. The war will cause irreparable damage that will likely include continued sanctions for years, a large and young population who fled that wont come back, hundreds of thousands dead or injured young men (potential workers), declining use of oil around the world, and a shrinking population that will shrink faster as a result of the war.
    1
  47. Putler allows it to happen so there is SOME benefit to it.
    1
  48.  @giantWario  I find my existence trivial!
    1
  49.  @VHCosta  I find your comment trivial
    1
  50.  @kreuner11  That's sadly the fact. I guess this isn't too bad for a click bait to get algorithm.
    1