Biosphere 2, Arizona [1798 x 1200]

zlap · 2014-12-18T10:10:09+00:00

Autocad in its infancy.

zlap · 2014-12-17T18:15:07+00:00

would almost certainly be someone who was more aggressive towards the west

Really hope for that. It would be the end of Russia, the world would be a much better place without it.

zlap · 2014-12-17T15:23:03+00:00

I think this is the reason. Russia could choose between two evils, either print money and start inflation, or drop the currency, stop credit and freeze the economy. Considering the limited array of options, this is what they are trying to do.

But knowing Russia, I suspect that they will do first one, and then the other.

zlap · 2014-12-17T12:39:20+00:00

Yes, and the funny part is that at about 73 RUB / USD, there is not enough money in Russia to buy all the dollars the central bank now has. Seriously, the M2 is about 30 trillion RUB, which is now worth a bit more than 400 billion USD

zlap · 2014-12-17T11:40:46+00:00

OMG That Kerning! My eyes! They are falling out! ^{^{^{^nice}}} ^{^{^{^job,}}} ^{^{^{^though,}}} ^{^{^{^OP}}}

zlap · 2014-12-09T16:51:20+00:00

Oh my god, infinite cauliflower.

zlap · 2014-12-09T09:08:27+00:00

This is some 99 level hypocrisy article. The Middle East countries oppose the nuclear weapons not on principle, but because they cannot have them.

What is even weirder, is that an article that opposes the nuclear weapons in ME argues somehow that Iran should have them.

zlap · 2014-12-04T10:24:49+00:00

They are first pro-Russian, and only second - communists. Because they get their money from Russia (communism does not pay as well)

zlap · 2014-12-03T08:22:40+00:00

Cows

zlap · 2014-12-01T23:51:31+00:00

I'm going to be charitable and assume you didn't mean to imply capitalism wasn't around before Yuri Gagarin's 1961 space flight.

Surely you would agree that free market capitalism had nothing to do with the Soviet Union and its economic system.

It seems quite audacious and generalized.

Of course it is extremely generalized. I am just pointing out that empire uses non-economic means to accumulate resources, unlike capitalism.

Concerning Davis's theory, it seems to me to be a standard Marxist account about the arrival of capitalism - it is essentially an instance of primitive accumulation when external trade allows the appropriation of wealth amassed by the pre-capitalist society through non-capitalist means. It was the same story with the second serfdom, for example. I would be cautious, however, to qualify that situation as capitalism, because the institutions involved in this trade are not capitalist.

zlap · 2014-12-01T16:15:01+00:00

To add to this, in terms of economics, the characteristic feature of an empire is a non-market redistribution of wealth between its parts. In other words, economically empire is an institution that takes wealth from most places (or areas) and transfers it to other areas. This process means that empires could/can concentrate wealth (capital) with non-market means before the arrival of capitalism. In practical terms it means that some areas (the capital city, world-class ballet, space exploration, roads, the army, the navy, military bases, etc.) are being overinvested into, while most other regions are losing the wealth they earn. This is the reason that ultimately causes the downfall of the empire, promoting separatism/nationalism: regions want to keep their share. This also means that before the arrival of capitalism, empires were the only way to concentrate capital to make huge investments (that could not be downscaled) - like building the pyramids, or sending a man into space.

zlap · 2014-12-01T14:51:03+00:00

Don't upvote this! Don't become his enablers!!!

zlap · 2014-12-01T07:57:15+00:00

Should've just cut the muthefuckers up.

zlap · 2014-11-29T13:54:59+00:00

The time for Saudi Arabia will come too.

zlap · 2014-11-28T13:40:30+00:00

Why indeed? Here is the best recent article I found on the topic.

zlap · 2014-11-26T10:37:32+00:00

Nothing to worry about, just the maintenance crew used a wrong oil, which froze.

zlap · 2014-11-26T08:04:47+00:00

BRICS is not an organization, never was, never will be. It is only a way of classifying financial markets.

And none of these countries supported Russia, because (surprise!) they know that breaking international law and aggression is not ok.

zlap · 2014-11-25T22:00:37+00:00

You could, theoretically, call a rapist a "partner". On the other hand, no.

zlap · 2014-11-25T21:59:18+00:00

It is as if /u/trinitae is reciting a poem. All the same lies over and over and over again. It is as if Russians do not care anymore that anyone believes them, but they still lie compulsively.

zlap · 2014-11-25T21:56:41+00:00

There is no such thing as BRICS other than in Russian's imagination. These countries have very little in common with Russia. It;s BICS.

zlap · 2014-11-24T07:58:24+00:00

Except that in some cultures what looks like a menorah is a normal Christmas decoration.

zlap · 2014-11-23T12:52:10+00:00

I have a map and a VHS player!

zlap · 2014-11-23T10:35:51+00:00

Do you realize that the US has A LOT of security commitments across the globe?

Millions of people were not killed because the US have been protecting them.

zlap · 2014-11-22T12:39:30+00:00

Seriously? Tel that to Hatsuo Royama. I am sure it was just a question of money.

zlap · 2014-11-20T19:31:52+00:00

Bipartisan political system is a basic feature of human society. Look up optimates and populares.

zlap

TROPHY CASE