| Thursday, April 14, 2005 - 03:05 am |
lol coca, you can only create the thread. you can't control what tangent the thread will end up on.
And that is where you are simply wrong. That statement contradicts the facts. Take a country and build corporations in it and tax the production. Voila, profit. Bam. More Gold Coins for you.
ok, let me explain again....
if you attack my country it will cost you over 14T in weapons. my country has over 30T in cash. if you take my country you get nothing but a C3 with 50m population. it will take you several weeks to even employ the population. atleast another month to upgrade them and accually make a profit. tell me how long it would take you to make back the 14T in weapons you just spent to take my country. dont forget to add war damage and extremely high SS costs and other index costs per month.
People starve not because they don't have money but because they can neither produce food nor steal or produce something else to provide in exchange for food.
yup, that explains how money is a resource. I can't produce or steal anything, but if I simply had money I could eat.
Money is valued solely by the demand and supply of the currency.
because it is a limited comoditiy, like a resource.
the rest of what you said is easily refered to as GNP (gross national product). you took the long way of explaining what I JUST SAID.
Conquering America would be highly unprofitable, as it has a national debt of (much) more than 5 trillion and continues to deficit spend... at least by your reasoning.
I never said the cash assets transfer to the victor john, not in the real world. infact, I have no idea if it does or not.
this is what I said:
that's were you said war isn't profitable. the error in your kung-fu was compairing SC to the real world. in SC natural resources are not limited, simply built. evaluating the countries "profit" from war can only be represented in a cash form, the assets. putting population a side, because it can be bought on the cash market, every country is exactly the same as another. cash assets are the only thing that puts strategic value to a country.
meaning that if you take the country over, the only thing that could possibly represent limited natural resources is the cash assets (in SC). if the cash assets are removed from your country after I conqure it, your country becomes the same as a C3. tell me why I would ever want to attack you? all I would be doing is spending trillions of dollars in weapons on a country that is no differant than a c3 in the end. money that would be better spent attacking a c3, buy some GCs, and buy population for the C3.
and you support this bullshit. no matter what ingenious post you make, your full of crap.
now say something new that I can disagree with you on.