Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In March 2025, in the thread "Re: OT, out", Umm asked the members: "Do you think it is because America is made up of magical soil that makes businesses based in America magically profitable?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (140) |
Author: marco100   😊 😞
Number: of 86276 
Subject: Re: Canada is seeking new friends
Date: 09/15/26 11:38 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 5
You're trying to have an intellectual discussion about the issues. You want to be presented with some thought-provoking and challenging responses that get into the nuts and bolts and perhaps sharpen your arguments or point of view. Maybe even change your mind if the merits are there.

That isn't what the Diehard Leftists are aiming for though. They aren't going to say anything like "I have researched the force structure of the NATO allies' militaries and this is where I think they could spend some more of their own money in a way which would enhance the overall defense posture of NATO for these reasons" and then actually give you some reasons that you could think about and analyze. Or, perhaps "The reason this particular NATO ally is not in a position to improve their military force structure in such and such a way is because Event A has to happen first, then Event B, then Event C." So then the discussion would become a thought experiment about how they could accomplish A, B, and C.

They aren't even going to argue from a coherent socialism/liberalism standpoint such as "Well France can't spend another 1% of GDP on their military, because they would have to make the following cuts in their domestic spending. With the current internal politics, that's impossible." And then the discussion would focus on that deficiency and how it might be rectified in another manner, or even, the need for the country that is not able or willing to spend more money, that they are leaving themselves with a serious vulnerability and should then expect some real world consequences for that vulnerability. And then how does that effect the other NATO countries including the U.S.? What are the implications of the choices?

You will never even get close to such a conversation because they aren't trying to test their own positions or ideas. You are trying to sharpen your blade on some very very dull rocks here.



**************
Replying to Dope1

I'm not going to indulge in this board's collective mental illnesses and need for iHatetrumpBadOrangeman constant TDS any longer. Therapy is best handled by a live psychiatrist, not wallowing on some random internet message board.
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to marco100 here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 86,214 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:
It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025
G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026
Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026
HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025
Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (140) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community