Euro/Dollar Parity?

[PawnTheS]

The brits and their special treatments. As a german I can only hope the Eu will be very harsh on them when brexit comes.

Should EU have been very harsh with West Germany when it annexed East Germany, wich was sooo expensive for all european states ? Oh, I remember, Germany rules EU :/

 

[Stolen Rutters]

Wow, the dollar is strong these days.

edit - uh, never mind. wrong thread

edit 2 - Nope it was the right thread, I just forgot to read the later pages (with the tangent on the general differences between regions).

 

[Emraldis]

Wow, the dollar is strong these days.

edit - uh, never mind. wrong thread

Yeah, don't you know? This thread is about fighting about international affairs. Get your on-topic BS outta here!

 

[WhiteWeasel]

Wow, the dollar is strong these days.

edit - uh, never mind. wrong thread

edit 2 - Nope it was the right thread, I just forgot to read the later pages (with the tangent on the general differences between regions).

Yeah, don't you know? This thread is about fighting about international affairs. Get your on-topic BS outta here!

You don't have worry about the dollar to euro conversion rates if you are partaking in the free of charge boxing match in the comments.

 

[eatssteak3]

Your fear is that Europe could be conquered, like back in WW2. At wich point the amount of resources the US could spend on Miltiary would go down.

I highly doubt anyone could conquer all of Europe, though individual weaker countries like Estonia is a different story.

Europe is also doing for America:
- working with your Secret Service. Going as far as putting legislation into place that allows your secret sevice to act on our Territory with impunity.
- buying and distributing your products
- taking up the bulk of refugees your armstrade based economy produces.
- cleaning up after your military campaigns, like Afghanistan.

All the things you've listed are things we return in kind in some form or another. Peculiarly in the case of the military, we do a lot for you and you do relatively little for us (with the exclusion of obviously noteworthy allies such as the UK and others who even with their misgivings have stood beside us and always pulled their weight).

Also:

A) Our economy is not armstrade based.
B) Voluntary transactions (wherein you buy a good or service we sell, or vice versa) is not doing something for someone else. It's a transaction, not a favor or anything like that.
C) Many of your countries took part in Afghanistan, even if we initiated it, you are not free to exempt yourselves from it and act like it's all our fault. The dishonesty in this sort of thinking is astounding.

So do not give us that "Europe is doing nothing for US" BS that Trump keeps spouting. The moment you look one second or ask somebody that actually works in foreing affairs, you would realise how wrong you are.

Europe (as a whole) is doing virtually nothing for the USA, and Trump has nothing to do with that. Voluntary transactions are not something you're doing for someone else, you do it for yourself. Or when you rent a hollywood movie are you doing it to support our economy rofl? You doing that means nothing insofar as what you do for us or what we owe each other.

 

[PawnTheS]

Aren't the folks in the EU just lovely? They cheat the USA and the UK by not spending enough money to match the agreed amount in NATO, yet if you democratically choose to not be a part of the EU, they want you as an individual and your country to suffer for it. They're lovely, really, can't see why anyone would leave the EU...

Be smarter than that, you're a Paradox Interactive games player.
When your coalition has 80% of all military spending in the world you don't have to raise it up, you have to lower it by a lot.

 

[Emraldis]

Voluntary transactions are not something you're doing for someone else

Neither is building up your own military.

 

[Stolen Rutters]

Yeah, don't you know? This thread is about fighting about international affairs. Get your on-topic BS outta here!

ha ha, I thought I accidentally posted in the wrong thread when I went to catch up and the topic was not the price! lol

 

[Emraldis]

ha ha, I thought I accidentally posted in the wrong thread when I went to catch up and the topic was not the price! lol

Yeah, stellaris forums has been getting pretty political recently. For a moment I thought I was on reddit.

 

[Shatterfury]

Because you don't kick the person honoring the agreement out, you kick the dishonest freeloaders out? I should think that's obvious.

Also to be clear, the USA does not need your protection. We have the pacific ocean, and a fleet more powerful than many of the next most powerful fleets combined. If the USA is in a defense treaty, it's not for it's own sake, it's for those we're defending.

Let`s get one thing clear, USA is not protecting anyone in Europe because we have no credible enemy.

For a bunch of troops and planes you get to have the biggest influence in Europe, even more that Germany and they actually PAY.

You shove your expensive equipment down the throat of a lot of European countries and you complain that you don`t get anything in return.
Yes you do, millions upon millions for crap gear like F-35 when a Gripen would do the same job for half the prince and a quarter of the upkeep.

False, we are giving you something: a pledge to defense is a benefit and how beneficial it is directly correlates to:

A) How reliable it is
B) How effective it is

The most powerful nation in the history of our world pledging to protect you, as it turns out, has a nice potential for deterrence from hostility. Our defense is like a massive insurance policy. It guarantees you insane levels of security in the (extreme admittedly) case of war, where we will bear the majority of the burden of spending and manpower. In exchange, we ask that you pay a reasonable amount so that in such a case you ease our burden somewhat. If you don't want the policy, don't sign up rofl. How does this level of common sense escape people? Don't freeload, meet a reasonable burden so that if anything ever happens others aren't carrying your weight completely, and everything is fine.

Talking about having a big ego, no, you are not the most powerful nation in the history of the world.

 

[eatssteak3]

Be smarter than that, you're a Paradox Interactive games player.
When your coalition has 80% of all military spending in the world you don't have to raise it up, you have to lower it by a lot.

Yeah, that's a very gamey view of the situation. The point in you increasing your spending is so that, if a war does happen, the USA doesn't end up spending the overwhelming vast majority and manpower on it.

Also NATO spends 900b and the world spending is 1800b.

http://books.sipri.org/files/FS/SIPRIFS1604.pdf
http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2017/02/daily-chart-11

You're not taking into account that NATO doesn't have a focused military in terms of location. Thusly, our budget must be MUCH larger so that we can respond to outside threats far away. A 300b military that is focused in one area, will be more effective in that area, than a 600b military that must project across the world to reach that area and project force effectively.

 

[Arkangilos]

Let`s get one thing clear, USA is not protecting anyone in Europe because we have no credible enemy.

For a bunch of troops and planes you get to have the biggest influence in Europe, even more that Germany and they actually PAY.

You shove your expensive equipment down the throat of a lot of European countries and you complain that you don`t get anything in return.
Yes you do, millions upon millions for crap gear like F-35 when a Gripen would do the same job for half the prince and a quarter of the upkeep.


Talking about having a big ego, no, you are not the most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Then tell me why half of my state is deployed to Ukraine right now? Why some of my brothers in my unit are over there? You do realize there is actually currently a militarized conflict in Europe, right?

 

[eatssteak3]

Let`s get one thing clear, USA is not protecting anyone in Europe because we have no credible enemy.

For a bunch of troops and planes you get to have the biggest influence in Europe, even more that Germany and they actually PAY.

You shove your expensive equipment down the throat of a lot of European countries and you complain that you don`t get anything in return.
Yes you do, millions upon millions for crap gear like F-35 when a Gripen would do the same job for half the prince and a quarter of the upkeep.

What? A mutual defense treaty is a pledge of protection. I don't understand what you're saying. Not to be a jerk (I get how hard second languages are), but you're not making much sense to me.

Talking about having a big ego, no, you are not the most powerful nation in the history of the world.

What country could defeat the USA in a war? Name it. Nazi Germany? The Soviet Union? I made an absolute statement, not a relative one. I did not say we are the most powerful relative to our enemies in the history of the world (though that's certainly arguable), I said we're the most powerful ever and we are. Name the single military that could defeat us. British cannons wouldn't do much to aircraft, roman swords not much to fully automatic rifles, Soviets had less people (291 million as of 1991, compared to our 318 million)/money (2.6 trillion gdp as of 1989, compared to our 18 trillion as of 2015)/equipment than we do now and were far technologically inferior to what we are now. They're the second strongest country in the history of the world.

Now I see what's wrong with Europe, for some reason you guys think these things called "facts" are ego, now I see why you avoid them so much.

 

[PawnTheS]

Now I see what's wrong with Europe, for some reason you guys think these things called "facts" are ego, now I see why you avoid them so much.

The problem with your argument is that you're comparing military forces with absolute values, that's pointless.
Even the army of a little country like Luxembourg could easily defeat Gengis Khan entire army, but that doesn't mean that Luxembourg is a bigger military power than Gengis Khan empire was.

 

[Shatterfury]

What? A mutual defense treaty is a pledge of protection. I don't understand what you're saying. Not to be a jerk (I get how hard second languages are), but you're not making much sense to me.

Oh...i`m making a lot of sense, far more than you.

What country could defeat the USA in a war? Name it. Nazi Germany? The Soviet Union? I made an absolute statement, not a relative one. I did not say we are the most powerful relative to our enemies in the history of the world (though that's certainly arguable), I said we're the most powerful ever and we are. Name the single military that could defeat us. British cannons wouldn't do much to aircraft, roman swords not much to fully automatic rifles, Soviets had less people (291 million as of 1991, compared to our 318 million)/money (2.6 trillion gdp as of 1989, compared to our 18 trillion as of 2015)/equipment than we do now and were far technologically inferior to what we are now. They're the second strongest country in the history of the world.

Now I see what's wrong with Europe, for some reason you guys think these things called "facts" are ego, now I see why you avoid them so much.

You barely spend 4,5% of your GDP on military.

Look up the history of Rome, the Ottomans or the British Empire at it`s zenith.

Vietnam defeated you.

Then tell me why half of my state is deployed to Ukraine right now? Why some of my brothers in my unit are over there? You do realize there is actually currently a militarized conflict in Europe, right?

HALF of your state ?

 

[Arkangilos]

The problem with your argument is that you're comparing military forces with absolute values, that's pointless.
Even the army of a little country like Luxembourg could easily defeat Gengis Khan entire army, but that doesn't mean that Luxembourg is a bigger military power than Gengis Khan empire was.

But it would be steamrolled by any other modern nation. I guarantee if France, Germany, Russia, or the US invaded it, the war would last only an hour.

And no, if Ghengis Khans whole army went against it, it would lose. Not enough ammo.

 

[Arkangilos]

Oh...i`m making a lot of sense, far more than you.



You barely spend 4,5% of your GDP on military.

Look up the history of Rome, the Ottomans or the British Empire at it`s zenith.

Vietnam defeated you.

Not militarily. We lost Vietnam because politicians wouldn't commit. We didn't fight it like a normal war. We didn't push north to hold it. Study your history.

 

[Shatterfury]

But it would be steamrolled by any other modern nation. I guarantee if France, Germany, Russia, or the US invaded it, the war would last only an hour.

And no, if Ghengis Khans while army went against it, it would lose. Not enough ammo.

It`s retarded not to make a distinction between the technological level of the eras.

Not militarily. We lost Vietnam because politicians wouldn't commit. We didn't fight it like a normal war. We didn't push north to hold it. Study your history.

You lost.

The goal was to stop the spread of communism and the whole deal ended up with US troops flying back home while the communists conquered South Vietnam.

Wars aren`t only won by military kill ratios.

 

[HumanMarine]

While this thread seems to moved on, I feel like saying to this:

I want to say Texas has to pay taxes for online goods like games, but I could be wrong about that.

I don't seem to pay any taxes for online purchases here. I think I've seen it for a few things, but they may have had something to do with/be in another state or something and it went by that states' laws.

 

[Arkangilos]

It`s retarded not to make a distinction between the technological level of the eras.

If they keep charging, and they have a million soldiers, you won't be able to kill enough of them by yourself (as a small country with almost no military) before they get to you.