StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Posted: **2007-03-06 06:15pm**

Might go better under N&P, but anyway...

Workers Unite! Break the chains of the Bourgeois Windows Opression!

Friends,

Not so long ago STR and I drew a great deal of fire from aggressive Linux using zealots for the “crime” of pointing out that using Linux is contrary to the very spirit of American free enterprise. Such was the weight of this criticism that I was forced to re-examine my claims. Could I have got it wrong? Could over a thousand comments be incorrect?

No, we were not wrong - just as the Linux using trolls who like to bully sensible family-oriented conservative groups like ShelleyTheRepublican were trying to convince us that Linux is as American as Apple-Pie, it’s founder and long-time enemy of free-enterprise was busy selling Linux to known terrorists and members of what our President calls the Axis of Evil.

thumb_linux-communism.jpg

RMS as he likes to be known to his hacker friends has convinced Cuba, one of the most evil nations of the entire world to adopt Linux as it’s official operating system. Henceforth the communist party which controls all aspects of life in this despotic regime of pure evil has made it illegal to buy the American made Microsoft Windows. Cubans who are denied freedom of choice by the repressive Marxist government are no longer allowed to buy Windows, because according to Fidel Castro, it is a “product of our imperialist oppressor”. Why does Castro hate America? Why does he forbid Cubans from importing great American products like Windows Vista?Please do not take my word for it, instead read what Rob Enderle, principal analyst of the Enderle group has to say about this matter. This is from Rob’s column at ITBusinessEdge, one of the most highly trusted sources of Information Technology news, and one that I personally rely on to stay ahead of the pack:

Linux, which isn’t really a product in my mind, as it co-defines the Open Source movement, is a brand. This brand has attributes that have been created over time and generally, at least for those that use it, represents something positive.
For some it represents the freedom to look at and mess with code, for others it represents “free” as in free beer, and for some it represents a strong weapon against capitalism, particularly with regard to software. I’m sure we could add some additional attributes, but the one that concerns me is this new concept that it is anti-American.

enderle.jpg

So what could turn Rob from a passionate Linux advocate three years ago into one of it’s most vocal critics? Like most of our readers, Rob is proud to be an American, and nothing is as ugly as the blind-prejudice of Anti-Americanism. He continues:
Can you imagine the NSA IT manager trying to get funding for a Linux based project right now? We are dropping into an extended election where the war in Iraq, terrorism, and nationalism are likely to be major battlegrounds. On the economic front, China remains a huge concern and in many battles it too is likely to come up, particularly as these battles are fought in areas where unions are strong.

If I’m running against an incumbent (who probably has no clue about software at all) and I know some organization under them deployed Linux and that it is being positioned as anti-U.S., might I not use that in the election? “Ladies and gentlemen I promise that under my administration we will not implement products like Linux that put the nation at risk, which contribute critical technology to the terrorists, and embolden our enemies.”

What a great election winning strategy. We at STR.com note with some dismay that Hillary Clinton, Al Gore and Barak Obama all have campaign sites which run on Linux. Could they display their utter contempt and loathing for America with any greater clarity than their choice of computer program? What’s so wrong with buying American? Windows Vista is the most technically advanced operating system ever built so why would Hillary Clinton prefer to use a product made by Eastern-European communists?

goreblunt.jpg

Anti-freedom activist and failed presidential candidate Albert Gore Jr claims to have invented the entire Internet, however in a display of arrogance and ignorance he has chosen to build his eco-lie website on a Linux web-server. Why does Al Gore hate America?

And if Rob Enderlie were correct, we would expect that the Pro-linuxists have begun exporting their anti-American philosophy and software to all of Democracy’s remaining enemies. As you might expect RMS has been selling his Linux software to communist governments like Venezuela and islamofascist rogue-states like Iran. As a result of this campaigning Iran now has a “LUG”, a forum for pro-linux activism. Would they have achieved this if they had not first been provided with American technology to copy? Should we be comfortable that stolen American trade-secrets which have been put into Linux are now in our enemies hands?

These Cubans may appear harmless, but will that still be the case now that they have access to the stolen Linux technology? The USA once almost had to bomb the heck out of this trouble-making rogue-state, are they driving us to war once again? We Americans pray for peace every day, but unprovoked aggression cannot be ignored.

Let me spell this out to you: We are at war with an axis of evil who may already be using this stolen technology to help build the atomic weapons with which the Islamofascists hope will one day be used to kill your children. Please support the one American party who has not bought into the lie of Linux: The Republicans. Your votes and donations will help keep America and the world free of the triple threats of Communism, Islamofascism and Linux

Yours in Christ,

Tristan J. Shuddery

Posted: **2007-03-06 06:21pm**

It's a joke, right?

Posted: **2007-03-06 06:28pm**

i'm pretty sure that i've already the nearly same thing with "linux is unamerican"

Posted: **2007-03-06 06:55pm**

Good thing I'm canadian, then.

But wait... isn't the "spirit of American free enterprise" about the little companies making it big through hard work? Shouldn't a free OS help them by putting their computer hardware at the "same" level of productivity as the Big Business?

Posted: **2007-03-06 10:12pm**

Stop trying to contradict the free marketeer with facts and logic!

Posted: **2007-03-07 03:04am**

It's been established (by an atheist website, no less) that Shelley is a joke. Therefore, attempting to use this article as an excuse for Republican-bashing is retarded, as Shelley is not actually a republican and the views expressed therein are not neccessarily held by mainstream Republicans.

For what it's worth, I know a large number of Republicans in the open source movement. Obviously, RMS is not one of them, however...

I do to a large extent regret RMS travelling abroad however to preach the gospel of Linux to evil dictators such as Fidel Castro, as it does do damage to Open Source as a brand. IMO, the obnoxious political activities of RMS and the Free Software Foundation are one of the biggest threats to the "brand" of Linux and Open Source, as is it were.

Posted: **2007-03-07 03:45am**

Elaro wrote:Good thing I'm canadian, then.

But wait... isn't the "spirit of American free enterprise" about the little companies making it big through hard work? Shouldn't a free OS help them by putting their computer hardware at the "same" level of productivity as the Big Business?

Yup, as well as forcing those with established and selling software products to improve the quality so that it can compete with "free". (Free Marketeer capitalistic Jew-pig speaking here

)

Sucks for the established software makers, but it's legal, and competition is almost Always good for the customer (While annoying those facing competition), and this is an excellent example of it (Imagine windows without Linux to threaten it, after all Mac is hardly a threat to it in the "big picture", as the target markets are quite different).

Posted: **2007-03-07 03:48am**

I spoke to some North Korean officials visiting my school a while ago, and I can confirm that they do in fact run linux on their systems. What systems they actually have in North Korea I'm not really sure, but they have linux!

Posted: **2007-03-07 03:49am**

Spyder wrote:Stop trying to contradict the free marketeer with facts and logic!

"Free marketeer", my ass. Many of these people don't even know what the phrase means anymore; it's like they think that it means "anything that supports Republican agenda" or something. So, if Linux is used in Cuba, it must be UnAmerican, and therefore by association anti-market.

So stupid.

Posted: **2007-03-07 04:56am**

"Free marketeer", my ass. Many of these people don't even know what the phrase means anymore; it's like they think that it means "anything that supports Republican agenda" or something.

And what do you expect from people who have been taught to believe in the Free Market(TM) like a Deus Ex Machina?

Do you expect them to actually understand it? Most of the "free marketeers" in the US, for example, are also anti-immigration and pro-sweatshop.

Since the start of the neocon age people are being told to "believe" in the market, just as they're being told, by the same neocons, to believe in God, Flag of USA, and other stuff. No rational understanding of anything ever comes out of faith.

Posted: **2007-03-07 05:16am**

Stas Bush wrote:
"Free marketeer", my ass. Many of these people don't even know what the phrase means anymore; it's like they think that it means "anything that supports Republican agenda" or something.
And what do you expect from people who have been taught to believe in the Free Market(TM) like a Deus Ex Machina? Do you expect them to actually understand it? Most of the "free marketeers" in the US, for example, are also anti-immigration and pro-sweatshop.

Actually Free-market while allowing Immigrants would be Pro-sweatshop due to the fact that:

A) You're providing real, productive work for the sweatshop workers, Who don't have a massive amount of options, as people don't choose low payed unskilled labor (that also pays ~1.5 times the average wage in the country) without a reason (No one forces them to do it).

B) The alternative to the sweatshops are in most cases: Starving to Death. Begging. Prostitution. Slavery.
Guess where most kids end up after their employer closes doors and moves to China rather than staying in Bangladesh? (I can provide you some examples if you want, but over-all the kids end up on the street or wearing someone else's dick, not in school or a Western government welfare system).

C) Many of the kids in those sweatshops end up setting up their own (There were a few hundred cases of it in the first generation in India alone), and from sweatshops you can progress to factories and from there to a higher minimum wage and more skilled labour.

The Sweatshops are terrible, but imposing our own laws (In Western, developed, post Industrial revolution) on them (By boycotting them) harms the workers, not the employers.

Posted: **2007-03-07 07:04am**

If movement of labour was absolutely free, either sweathshops would never arise in the first place, or the whole world would be an exploitative factory. Because workers would freely move to sectors and territories where capital accumulates.

Posted: **2007-03-07 07:55am**

Stas Bush wrote:If movement of labour was absolutely free, either sweathshops would never arise in the first place, or the whole world would be an exploitative factory.

Are you talking about a world-wide equalization of resources and workers?
This is laughable, since most high paying jobs require training and skill, how many Sweat shop workers can operate a robot? Polish a Diamond? Design a suit? Program a game in English?

There is a difference in terms of low end unskilled labour, but even there their exists a difference in productivity since an unskilled labourer in construction in the US will most likely be using a Crane or buzzsaw while, say in Israel the building manager will send the Cheap Thailand workers scurrying to the top with barrels of nails on their backs due to low labour costs.

The Key here is productivity, but even more importantly is it (As prosaic as it may sound) "Demand & Supply". In America unskilled labour is not well over 70% of the job pool, nor are their so many other unskilled labourers with identical qualifications bucking to replace you (The higher the supply the lower the pay due to low demand), combined with a relatively low amount of alternatives not requiring a very high "starting point" (Enough money for an university education).

Because workers would freely move to sectors and territories where capital accumulates.

Ever heard of Globalization?

(Yes I know you have, that was a joke).
That is happening today, though slowly and mainly with skilled labour (Engineers from India) but increasingly with unskilled labour due to illegal immigration or the "flattening" of the global village (Call centers in Bangladesh answering calls in Kentucky, and a center in China taking drive through orders from a McDonald in the US via a picture while reducing cost and increasing speed, reducing errors & improving service).

Capital is capital, not mere cash or physical resources - You won't suddenly turn into a millionare if you live in Switzerland, Lichtenstein or California, and you can become a millionare in Africa as a scrap metal king (Scrap metal is just another form of physical capital). Nor will your wage as a farm hand increase by an order of magnitude from the UK to the US, if anything the former might happen due to a less mechanized & smaller scale agricultural sector in the UK which requires more unskilled labour and uses less mechanization (Despite over-all wages, taxes and GDP per capita being lower).

I have to say, I've been looking forward to a little Economics discussion with you, alas all but one of the strongly Left wing Economists I've met in real life (not on SDN, and ignoring Wong) have been a bunch of idiots (Unlike the fine Liberal thinkers to be found here

).
(Israel is extremely left wing in terms of the economy, Socialism is the left wing version of communism, with Israel having the largest proportion of Land owned by the government of any country in the western world by far [All land was nationalized by the government, save that belonging to Arabs]).

Posted: **2007-03-07 11:10am**

RThurmont wrote:IMO, the obnoxious political activities of RMS and the Free Software Foundation are one of the biggest threats to the "brand" of Linux and Open Source, as is it were.

What are these obnoxious political activities? care to elaborate?

Edi

Posted: **2007-03-07 12:07pm**

Are you talking about a world-wide equalization of resources and workers?

I'm talking of a total abolition of any non-economic barriers to capital movement, and ideally the abolition of economic barriers as well. This would create a perfect free market. I'm not talking about "equization" of wages or anything, but the equization of movement abilities, that is namely to be able to move anywhere, anytime where capital concentrates, for 100% percent of world's workforce.

This is laughable, since most high paying jobs require training and skill, how many Sweat shop workers can operate a robot? Polish a Diamond? Design a suit? Program a game in English?

Re-education is a natural barrier, a biological one and you can do whatever you want but this ain't going to be changed, you can only cheapen the education to the most possible extent to allow for equal opportunity. Territorial lock of population is a non-natural one. THe issue is not the re-education. The issue is that those SW workers don't even have the ability to freely move to the US (a place where lots of capitals concentrate) and try to re-educate themselves or at least squish out the fat US manual labour sector which can't compete with their ultra-low, exploitative labour prices

That's what I meant by "free movement", right now capital is unevenly concentrated in the world and the immigration wave to America reflects that fully, but this is but a MINOR fraction of the population that is willing to go after the capital, allow people to do it and American concentraction would very soon either de-concentrate or cause a social crisis due to too many immigrants and overpopulation

Ever heard of Globalization?

Yeah. And it sucks - outsource to sweatshop the production of goods, pay a person 70 USD pm for unskilled labour, the move the good to domestic market, sell to a capitalist for 700 USD piece, superprofit. If the unskilled worker was able to move to the US freely, oh, boy, what a cool free market woudl that be, I think even the most ardent free market advocates would feel the heat from their over-subsidized, first-world populations!

Capital is capital, not mere cash or physical resources

Capital is capital, right. Capital in it's physical and monetary forms, when it concentrates, attracts workers until the situation "evens out". Because of immigration barriers, the situation doesn't even out. Ever. When the absolute majority of the workforce is immobile, while capital is highly mobile, it can cause widespread destruction in some places and super-welfare in other places.

Theoretically, with the zero-transaction cost, free unbarred capital and labour movement (->0 transfer costs), such situation should never arise - capital and labour would 100% fluently move from sector to sector, territory to territory and never leave each other.

Now, I'm perfectly aware there are natural barriers to both capital and labour mobility. Capital in physical form is hard to transfer, for example, so you will have to liquidate it first (turn into money) and this itself carries a cost. Labour is hard to shift from sector to sector immediately since this takes re-education. But! Capital is today a magnitude more mobile than labour, especially territory-wise, with the international banking, globalization and all that. Supermobile money.

Are people as mobile as money? Shit no; not even 1/10th as mobile.

(Israel is extremely left wing in terms of the economy, Socialism is the left wing version of communism, with Israel having the largest proportion of Land owned by the government of any country in the western world by far

Oh, rly? Do socialist parties run successfully in elections then?

And I always knew Israel were dirty commies, with their Kibutzes

Just call it a fancy Jewish word, no one would understand that it's a commie cooperative

Posted: **2007-03-07 12:52pm**

stas wrote:This would create a perfect free market. I'm not talking about "equization" of wages or anything, but the equization of movement abilities, that is namely to be able to move anywhere, anytime where capital concentrates, for 100% percent of world's workforce.

This would require a highly educated population capable of affording to travel between countries with their possessions and possessed of a high degree of Cultural wealth (As well as "Human wealth" I.E Education), such as the highly mobile workforce of the States or International businessmen.
(My dad for example has gone from Israel to New York to London to Israel to London to Romania over the space of a few years/decades, and even he has a hard time learning the "language of the city", cultural traits, situational norms, etc'. Now if he couldn't learn English or started off without any of the local languages or a strong grasp of Western culture...).

There is a large amount of restrictive behaviour imposed by the governments and special interet groups, but not all workers are mobile, and unskilled workers less so (And a worker who can't speak the local language is going to get paid a pittance, though the fact that the pittance is massive to him notwithstanding).

Re-education is a natural barrier, a biological one and you can do whatever you want but this ain't going to be changed, you can only cheapen the education to the most possible extent to allow for equal opportunity.

Except that the Education itself even when free is far from equal, just compare Cambridge to the university of Jordan (ME Jordan), or the schools in Africa or Shitistan to those of Japan.

I've said it before (To others) and I'll say it again, Education is PARAMOUNT to improving an Areas situation, followed closely by stability and a productive financial structure (Belgium has among the worlds best education systems but its GDP is relatively low, especially compared to the states and its underfunded school system).
Defense is among the last items on my list of whats essential to the wellbeing of a nation (Looks shiftily around before joining the army) "Er, that is unless you're here where the IDF is essential, yay Israel!"

.

stas Bush wrote: eah. And it sucks - outsource to sweatshop the production of goods, pay a person 70 USD pm for unskilled labour, the move the good to domestic market, sell to a capitalist for 700 USD piece, superprofit.

Sucks how? The customers get better & cheaper goods, the producers get a job that is highly paying by their standards and allows them to acquire the skills and technology to make their own product given time (The case now with India's Pharmaceuticals and China within a few years), while the middle-men make a profit while facilitating all this and improving efficiency.
In addition it's allowing Western companies to work all over the world more efficiently while equalizing Capital, and outsourcing the less "creative" aspects of a job abroad allowing increased specialization (The heart of efficiency).

stas Bush wrote: Because of immigration barriers, the situation doesn't even out. Ever.

Disparity will always exist, always has and always will, attempting to equalize everything only causes damage.
I'll take an "unequal distribution of wealth" over "equally distributed Poverty" anyday, thanks

.

stas Bush wrote: Theoretically, with the zero-transaction cost, free unbarred capital and labour movement (->0 transfer costs), such situation should never arise - capital and labour would 100% fluently move from sector to sector, territory to territory and never leave each other.

So if the world was a single giant city with everywhere within walking distance and sharing the exact same culture, language & relative education

. The situation you propose is a purely theoretical one, and not one that can possibly be achieved even as an ideal, you do recognize that, right?

Are people as mobile as money? Shit no; not even 1/10th as mobile.

Less than a thousandth, Though the disparity used to be in the opposite direction back in the days of the pure barter economy.
[/quote]

Oh, rly? Do socialist parties run successfully in elections then?

It's the basic policy upon which the left/right sclae is based, same as the US relying on capitalism and the UK on a welfare state.

And I always knew Israel were dirty commies, with their Kibutzes

Kibbutzes are the left wing version of Commie farms, we didn't have a central party leadership, it was a grass-roots movement.
And as always this experiment that benefited from the finest of each generation, government help and a well established (Relative to a barren desert or hordes of uneducated, non Hebrew/English speaking immigrants from the Far east).
And economically, it collapsed once a decade, every decade since 1948. You'd think the commies might have taken note

.

Israel also has a government granted monopoly & price fixing on most things including bread & milks [though those only have price fixing], but includes bus systems & other public transportation (Though a private company has been allowed to compete on the furthest, least travelled routes on alternate days, meaning that I have a bus here 16 times a day at half the price of what it used to be 6 years and 3 times a day ago

).
In addition the government owns all the land and leases it arbitrarily (You're not allowed to buy unless you're an Arab, in which case you also get the land at about 1/8th the cost), and at a high, fixed cost.
Theres also the Duopoloy of the banks (Ace, if you mention a word to them about who owns the banks I WILL kill you

) which offer half the interest rates of comparable western banks, and thats after Netanyahu broke their power somewhat when he was minister of finance (For all his stupidity and fundy dad, at least he did wonders for liberalizing the economy and allowing some goddamn growth).
I can give you a few dozen examples if you want, but suffice to say Israel has a massive degree of Government intervention and control, and it stiffles the economy (Every Jew abroad tends to succeed far more than in Israel, an amusing if tragic case, especially due to the brain drain, helped somewhat by the very high taxes)

Posted: **2007-03-07 01:04pm**

The situation you propose is a purely theoretical one, and not one that can possibly be achieved even as an ideal, you do recognize that, right?

I'm not "proposing" this. This is the perfect market in classic capitalism, absolutely mobile factors of production. Too bad this model doesn't work in reality, and with the ever-growing disparity between the capital and labour respecitve mobility, isn't even barely reflecting the current situation.

Also, even if this cannot be achieved "as an ideal", removing personal movement barriers would move it closer to this ideal, i.e. to the free market capitalism all capitalists are so eager for. But perhaps not so: corporatist interests certainly stay with the maintaining of those barriers, not their dismantling, since profit margin in the US falls but if outsourced production to cheaper countries, you can get superprofit.

But, even if there's a plane distance, how much more would immigration from China and the Third world be in case there would be no need for a visa/citizenship? It would be _massive_, and it would very soon even out the capital concentration, just as it _SHOULD_ in a 100% free market.

Though the disparity used to be in the opposite direction back in the days of the pure barter economy.

This economy is no more; today we have capitalism, and I'm talking about it's theoretical model and the fact that it's practice is very far from theory.

Kibbutzes are the left wing version of Commie farms, we didn't have a central party leadership, it was a grass-roots movement.

Technically Soviets weren't a party thing either. They were meant to be independent grassroots cooperatives which control production, takng over farms and factories.

I can give you a few dozen examples if you want, but suffice to say Israel has a massive degree of Government intervention and control, and it stiffles the economy

I think ongoing wars and supermilitarization are stiffling it quite more than your version of socialist redistribution

Posted: **2007-03-08 01:32am**

Stas Bush wrote:
The situation you propose is a purely theoretical one, and not one that can possibly be achieved even as an ideal, you do recognize that, right?
I'm not "proposing" this. This is the perfect market in classic capitalism, absolutely mobile factors of production. Too bad this model doesn't work in reality, and with the ever-growing disparity between the capital and labour respecitve mobility, isn't even barely reflecting the current situation.

Also, even if this cannot be achieved "as an ideal", removing personal movement barriers would move it closer to this ideal, i.e. to the free market capitalism all capitalists are so eager for.

True, towards the so called ideal of "Perfect competition".

But perhaps not so: corporatist interests certainly stay with the maintaining of those barriers, not their dismantling, since profit margin in the US falls but if outsourced production to cheaper countries, you can get superprofit.

While funneling Capital to those countries.

But, even if there's a plane distance, how much more would immigration from China and the Third world be in case there would be no need for a visa/citizenship? It would be _massive_, and it would very soon even out the capital concentration, just as it _SHOULD_ in a 100% free market.

Not as the current situation stands, they will even out the unskilled labour end, but Chine still lacks Scientists, engineers etc' (Despite producing them at a far higher rate than the US).
You need a competitive degree of productivity to draw capital or very low wage costs, Chine has low productivity but is cheap enough that it doesn't matter.

Though the disparity used to be in the opposite direction back in the days of the pure barter economy.
This economy is no more; today we have capitalism, and I'm talking about it's theoretical model and the fact that it's practice is very far from theory.
Kibbutzes are the left wing version of Commie farms, we didn't have a central party leadership, it was a grass-roots movement.
Technically Soviets weren't a party thing either. They were meant to be independent grassroots cooperatives which control production, takng over farms and factories.

Odd, the Biography I read of Stalin had it as even Lenin knowing that they were the "Right" , and refusing to allow "The ignorant mass of the people" governance.
Namely a dictatorship, only with a stronger emphasis on political capital rather than cash.

I can give you a few dozen examples if you want, but suffice to say Israel has a massive degree of Government intervention and control, and it stiffles the economy
I think ongoing wars and supermilitarization are stiffling it quite more than your version of socialist redistribution

Israel had a 0.1% yearly growth average for the 90's, this year even with a war it had a growth rate of almost 5%.
The 3 year delay on people is a drain, as is 25% of the GDP being sucked up by the army, but full scale recruitment is RARE, we don't have a war regularily. (Though the west banks and terror attacks have caused great damage to Israels internal economy, but if you're a tech firm in the center it won't bother you in a meaningful fashion).

Posted: **2007-03-08 02:48am**

Not as the current situation stands, they will even out the unskilled labour end, but Chine still lacks Scientists, engineers etc' (Despite producing them at a far higher rate than the US).

Oh, if they're allowed to enlist american education, expect massive downing of wages even in high skill sectors as soon as the first wave of graduates come out.
Of course, America, or the First World for that matter, would never allow that - it would mean a possibilty for social explosion.

Odd, the Biography I read of Stalin had it as even Lenin knowing that they were the "Right" , and refusing to allow "The ignorant mass of the people" governance.

The soviets weren't created by Lenin. They were a self-organization of people. And Lenin indeed allowed the soviets to capture control of factories. Essentially an anarcho-syndicalist mechanism.

The 3 year delay on people is a drain, as is 25% of the GDP being sucked up by the army

25%? You're essentially living on the brink of a war economy, even if you don't have war all the time.

Posted: **2007-03-08 04:01am**

Oh, if they're allowed to enlist american education, expect massive downing of wages even in high skill sectors as soon as the first wave of graduates come out.

Yup, what's happening now is that the less "creative" work is being channeled over-seas (Accountants sending the "Fill out forms" work while the American accountants spend their free time researching tax holes and helping their clients face to face).
Still in the long term and as language skills are acquired (India's superior over-all level of "English" is one of the reasons that they're "Stealing" ("") high skill jobs successfully, unlike Say China (So far)) there will be real independent competition from abroad, not just "Supplemental" companies.

Of course, America, or the First World for that matter, would never allow that - it would mean a possibilty for social explosion.

You mean like the current case of thousands of Indian graduates from the states, a great percentage of whom do return home? Or the fact that India has excellent technical universities of its own (Though hardly MIT), or the 2-3 times greater level of Chinese engineers & scientists graduating each year relative to the US (Though China has over 4 times America's population, so it's less impressive in proportion).

And Lenin indeed allowed the soviets to capture control of factories.

Not just the factories & industrial complex but the government (The stamping out of the "Menshiviks" for example).

25%? You're essentially living on the brink of a war economy, even if you don't have war all the time.

Hey, I'm against it and support cutting down the forced conscription drastically as well as the budget (after the scaremongering over the recent Lebanon2 war the army got an addition 250 million $ added to its budget, giving it about 11.2-10.7 of the governments budget).
US aid is the reason that the massive drain doesn't cripple the economy even more, but it is crippling the massive human potential of the economy & country (Begins rant about how the government controlled economy is crippling and will destroy the countries ability to finance a war in the long term, "Capitalism!", "Liberty" etc')

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Linux - OS of the Axis of Evil

Linux - OS of the Axis of Evil