Is a complete collapse imminent?

[CCGirl]

You can claim all that crap all you want, but they were communist. No true scotsman fallacy doesn't work.



Communism isn't defined by a book, it's defined by the real world application of the principles of the book. That was the USSR. Capitalism is perfect on paper, too.



Really? Is that why more Russians died than anyone else despite the fact that they were on the winning side?



Maybe, maybe not. But I guess that means that commy and socialist policies just are for America.

So you have no interest in learning, I wish I hadnt wasted my time posting educational bits for you.

 

[ScottBot]

Had Germany been able to produce in Russia, she would have won. Instead Russia was an incredable drain on Germany... had Russia fallen it would have been the exact opposite. Germany would have defeated England, and eventually the United States.

Russia was a black hole that absorbed an incredable amount of German military power. Had Russia been quickly conqored by Germany, we would have lost the war. Saying we could have beaten Germany without Russia is almost as bad as saying the war could have been won without the help of the United States.

I didn't say quickly, I meant eventually. The Soviet Union would have been an incredible logistical drain for Germany.

 

[drGiaus]

So you have no interest in learning, I wish I hadnt wasted my time posting educational bits for you.

No, i have no intrest in you "no true scotsman" fallacy.

We've seen communism, we've seen what it does. Just because it never looked like it did on paper doesn't mean that it wasn't comminism, it means that communism on paper is a pipe dream.

 

[ACougar]

Add roughly half the Soviet Unions production capacity to that of Germany and deduct at least half the resources that Germany was pouring into the Soviet Union at almost any point in the war prior to the battle of the bulge and you get a huge win for Germany.

I didn't say quickly, I meant eventually. The Soviet Union would have been an incredible logistical drain for Germany.

 

[chaz345]

Note the Social Security system, Medicare, public education, and so on.

Rather than proof that there are some areas the federal governemnt should be involved in, those things are more like proof that the federal governemnt should be as small as practical.

SS is nothing more than a giant mechanism by which government debt is shifted from one generation the ones that follow. It doesn't have to be that way, it would be a relatively simple matter to make it impossible for the government to spend that money on anything else, but of course that couldn't happen until all of the IOU's are paid back into the system, a process that would take decades at best and require some seriously painful cuts elsewhere in the budget.

 

[MerchantofMenace]

Add roughly half the Soviet Unions production capacity to that of Germany and deduct at least half the resources that Germany was pouring into the Soviet Union at almost any point in the war prior to the battle of the bulge and you get a huge win for Germany.

The Germans could not have conquered the United States.

During World War 2, the US built Thirty-five aircraft carriers. (That's just the ones during the war.) The Germans produced none.

The US had a dozens of battleships. The Germans had five.

Hundreds of destroyers. Dozens of heavy and light cruisers.

Over 50,000 Sherman tanks. By contrast, the Germans built less than 15,000 Panzer IV's and Panthers combined.

 

[ACougar]

All right let's play this out a bit... Germany controls the USSR, all of Europe, the Middle East and North Africa. It is able to link up directly with Japan via China and the USSR.

The United States doesn't get German Nuclear and Rocket scientists and instead of the first Atomic weapons going off at Hiroshema and Nagasaki they go off in Philidelphia and New York. Assuming the US refused to fold at that point the struggle continues in South and Central America while Axis powers consolidate thier gains in the rest of the world and bomb US production centers with rockets and the occasional atomoc weapon.

Unless one of the Axis powers implodes or they go to war with each other... the US would eventually fall.

The Germans could not have conquered the United States.

During World War 2, the US built Thirty-five aircraft carriers. (That's just the ones during the war.) The Germans produced none.

The US had a dozens of battleships. The Germans had five.

Hundreds of destroyers. Dozens of heavy and light cruisers.

Over 50,000 Sherman tanks. By contrast, the Germans built less than 15,000 Panzer IV's and Panthers combined.

 

[TheNewWorldMan]

SS is nothing more than a giant mechanism by which government debt is shifted from one generation the ones that follow. It doesn't have to be that way, it would be a relatively simple matter to make it impossible for the government to spend that money on anything else, but of course that couldn't happen until all of the IOU's are paid back into the system, a process that would take decades at best and require some seriously painful cuts elsewhere in the budget.

The underlying problem with the Social Security system is that politicians can't seem to make up their minds whether it's a simple tax, a mandatory savings account, or a transfer payments apparatus. As a result, it performs none of those functions well, and suffers from all the deficiencies of each of those.

 

[ScottBot]

The underlying problem with the Social Security system is that politicians can't seem to make up their minds whether it's a simple tax, a mandatory savings account, or a transfer payments apparatus. As a result, it performs none of those functions well, and suffers from all the deficiencies of each of those.

SS is a Ponzi scheme that makes Madoff look like Amway. People who contribute today are paying the people who receive today, and when the people who pay into the system now need to receive, there won't be anything there. The Baby Boomers are going to break the system.

 

[Avatar]

SS is a Ponzi scheme that makes Madoff look like Amway. People who contribute today are paying the people who receive today, and when the people who pay into the system now need to receive, there won't be anything there. The Baby Boomers are going to break the system.

Just do what the US always does when it needs more money. Borrow it from China. who cares if the SS checks are written in Mandarin?

 

[Joachim]

SS is a Ponzi scheme that makes Madoff look like Amway. People who contribute today are paying the people who receive today, and when the people who pay into the system now need to receive, there won't be anything there. The Baby Boomers are going to break the system.

I disagree. The baby boomers aren't going to break the system, because they aren't going to be able to retire. A fair number of them have seen their retirement go away and if they haven't pulled out by now they will probably be wiped out by July. AIG is still failing. They will be reporting a 60 billion dollar loss next Monday. That alone should be worth a loss of another 250 in the Dow.


The main employment problem this decade is going to be that the baby boomers that were going to retire aren't because they will be putting their kids through college (because student loans, at least for levels below grad school will now be history) or because they will still be just trying to keep that roof of their head. It's a shame that it is the baby boomer middle class that will suffer, but the baby boomers will be getting just desserts for their errors. The problem is, by continuing to work they will keep the younger generations from being able to move up into their jobs, the jobs that are still there. I believe that this will end up driving young people into the military as I explain here

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=50739798#post50739798

 

[chaz345]

The underlying problem with the Social Security system is that politicians can't seem to make up their minds whether it's a simple tax, a mandatory savings account, or a transfer payments apparatus. As a result, it performs none of those functions well, and suffers from all the deficiencies of each of those.

The real problem is that the politicians see it as a giant slush fund to be spent on whatever it is they want this year.

If it were truly separated from the general budget there'd be enough in there for it to serve as everyone's primary retirement income.

 

[c71clark]

The Germans could not have conquered the United States.

During World War 2, the US built Thirty-five aircraft carriers. (That's just the ones during the war.) The Germans produced none.

The US had a dozens of battleships. The Germans had five.

Hundreds of destroyers. Dozens of heavy and light cruisers.

Over 50,000 Sherman tanks. By contrast, the Germans built less than 15,000 Panzer IV's and Panthers combined.

I didn't know that. Man, we kick #@%

 

[MerchantofMenace]

I didn't know that. Man, we kick #@%

And I didn't include the escort carriers. The US build 122 of those. They'd free up the fleet carriers from convoy duty.

During World War 2, the US build 324,000 aircraft compared to 189,000 for Germany.

The US built 200,000 pieces of artillery over 37mm compared to 159,000 for Germany.

The US made 105,000 mortars compared with 73,000 for Germany. (These are easy to make, though.)

The US made 2,600,000 machine guns, compared to 674,000 for Germany.

The US made 2,300,000 trucks, compared with 345,000 for Germany.

Germany outproduce the United States in coal, and in submarines.

In the US, the Springfield armory alone could produce 164 rifles per hour. That's 122,000 a month at the high point!

 

[ScottBot]

And I didn't include the escort carriers. The US build 122 of those. They'd free up the fleet carriers from convoy duty.

During World War 2, the US build 324,000 aircraft compared to 189,000 for Germany.

The US built 200,000 pieces of artillery over 37mm compared to 159,000 for Germany.

The US made 105,000 mortars compared with 73,000 for Germany. (These are easy to make, though.)

The US made 2,600,000 machine guns, compared to 674,000 for Germany.

The US made 2,300,000 trucks, compared with 345,000 for Germany.

Germany outproduce the United States in coal, and in submarines.

In the US, the Springfield armory alone could produce 164 rifles per hour. That's 122,000 a month at the high point!

I do have to say, that the German MG-42 was, and still is, an awesome piece of hardware. It is still used, essentially unchanged to this day. That's how good it was, and still is (although its been rebadged the MG3).

Now, if they could have gotten the King Tiger to do more than burn through fuel at an enormous clip, all them Shermans would have been interesting targets, as the 75mm main gun on the Sherman couldn't even dent the king tiger's armor.

While we did built alot of really good stuff, the German's stuff was for the most part, far superior to ours. Even the P-51 Mustang, arguably the besst air superiority fighter ever built (in its time) would have been outdone by the Messerschmidt-262 eventually.

 

[drGiaus]

Just do what the US always does when it needs more money. Borrow it from China. who cares if the SS checks are written in Mandarin?

Well, mine better be in Cantonese, or there's gonna be hell to pay.

 

[MerchantofMenace]

I do have to say, that the Germany MG-42 was, and still is, an awesome piece of hardware. It is still used, essentially unchanged to this day. That's how good it was, and still is (although its been rebadged the MG3).

The US M-2 beats the service length of the MG-42 by a couple of decades.

Now, if they could have gotten the King Tiger to do more than burn through fuel at an enormous clip, all them Shermans would have been interesting targets, as the 75mm main gun on the Sherman couldn't even dent the king tiger's armor.

That's why you whistle up a P-47 on the radio. Problem solved.

While we did built alot of really good stuff, the German's stuff was for the most part, far superior to ours. Even the P-51 Mustang, arguably the besst air superiority fighter ever built (in its time) would have been outdone by the Messerschmidt-262 eventually.

The problem with the German stuff is the engineering. It's so complicated that it's difficult to produce and it's not qualitatively superior enough to overcome that advantage. Think of the 6000 US Abrams tanks versus the 25,000 T-72 types. The Abrams at four-to-one odds can probably come out on top. The German stuff wasn't that good.

 

[Avatar]

Well, mine better be in Cantonese, or there's gonna be hell to pay.

lol

 

[ScottBot]

The US M-2 beats the service length of the MG-42 by a couple of decades.



That's why you whistle up a P-47 on the radio. Problem solved.



The problem with the German stuff is the engineering. It's so complicated that it's difficult to produce and it's not qualitatively superior enough to overcome that advantage. Think of the 6000 US Abrams tanks versus the 25,000 T-72 types. The Abrams at four-to-one odds can probably come out on top. The German stuff wasn't that good.

Drat. Foiled again!

Although as a side note, I did meet the author of Hell Hawks who wrote about the P-47 squadrons in the European theater. That was one heck of a plane.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Hey, I would love to participate in a WWII forum. Is there one here?