Should the US wave latin American debt?
Northeast free world
10-02-2006, 00:52
I have been thinking about this topic for a while and i wonder what you guys thought.
Sel Appa
10-02-2006, 00:53
Never. They should have become Communist while they had the chance.
Northeast free world
10-02-2006, 00:55
Well I thought if the US waved there debt they could start growing. And we don't have to wave all of it.
Drunk commies deleted
10-02-2006, 00:56
I have been thinking about this topic for a while and i wonder what you guys thought.
Yep. We should wave it in their faces as they go broke. We should, however, under no circumstances waive it.
Northeast free world
10-02-2006, 00:57
how much do they owe us anyway?
Free Farmers
10-02-2006, 00:59
No. Until the world stops being so damn hypocritical about debts, we should stop letting countries suddenly not owe us the money they borrowed. The whole world wants us to never collect on debts and for us to pay out all of ours. It is sheer hypocracy and greed.
Funky Evil
10-02-2006, 01:11
NO!
look, the last time i checked, borrowing without paying back was called theft.
The Atlantian islands
10-02-2006, 01:14
NO!
look, the last time i checked, borrowing without paying back was called theft.
Thank you, Nation State issue!
New Foxxinnia
10-02-2006, 01:29
Only if the rest of the world waives our debt.
Neu Leonstein
10-02-2006, 01:29
Meh, you won't see that money on way or the other.
Plus, every cent these governments have to pay back is missing for building that new road or hospital...and what happens? People get angry at America, and Capitalism, and their government and vote for Socialists.
You can go on and on about the principle, but I've got something better for you:
Joe Stiglitz (Economics Nobel Prize Winner) on forgiving national debt -
http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/develop/debt/2003/11odiousdebts.htm
Jewish Media Control
10-02-2006, 02:07
I have been thinking about this topic for a while and i wonder what you guys thought.
I think you mean waive. And no, I think we should get some cocaine in exchange. They've got enough, don't they? I mean WTF?
Nyuujaku
10-02-2006, 02:29
Meh. If we don't waive it, they'll do it for us. They can't pay it back, we knew that when we lent it to them. It's gonna happen anyways, may as well get some good publicity for once.
H N Fiddlebottoms VIII
10-02-2006, 02:38
We should trade the South American debt to China for egg rolls and bootleg copies of Freedomland.
Kossackja
10-02-2006, 02:47
what about the huge debt the usa are in? who is gonna waive their twin deficits?
Frostguarde
10-02-2006, 02:51
In exchange for waiving their debts, they must become states. It's the only way. >_>
Tremerica
10-02-2006, 03:09
No, instead we should include them in on NAFTA.
No. We should instead invade them, take the money by any means necessary, and then charge them for the expenses it took to mobilize our troops. Rally round the flag, and bolster Bush's faltering presidency. And then we can claim they had weapons of mass destruction if anyone starts asking. :rolleyes:
The Lone Alliance
10-02-2006, 03:19
Only if everyone else waives everyone's debts. Level the playing field, but then everyone will start borrowing again so the cycle will start again.
I would like to take this opportunity to point out that if there was no money, this would not be a problem.
Now I shall retire from this thread for the time being. Adios.
Achtung 45
10-02-2006, 03:24
Only if everyone else waives everyone's debts. Level the playing field, but then everyone will start borrowing again so the cycle will start again.
that gets me thinking...what's the use for money anyways? why don't we abolish money? that'll solve everything!:p The U.S. has it's own $8.2 trillion debt to worry about, we should never wave their debt or even waive it.
Seven Spin Clans
10-02-2006, 03:25
Only if everyone else waives everyone's debts. Level the playing field, but then everyone will start borrowing again so the cycle will start again.
Oh, oh, lets do that!
Free ride, baby!
Achtung 45
10-02-2006, 03:26
I would like to take this opportunity to point out that if there was no money, this would not be a problem.
Now I shall retire from this thread for the time being. Adios.
wow you read my mind...or i read your mind, whichever way, it all works out.
Free Farmers
10-02-2006, 03:30
No, instead we should include them in on NAFTA.
Do you know what NAFTA stands for?
I'll give you a hint:
North
American
Free
Trade
Agreement
Now you might want to take a look at that top part, the first letter is kinda important. Unless these countries some how convince every geographer in the United States that South America and North America are the same place, then they are out of luck for that.
Perhaps a new treaty called AFTA could work.
Neu Leonstein
10-02-2006, 03:35
Perhaps a new treaty called AFTA could work.
Cut the "F" and you're getting there.
Free Farmers
10-02-2006, 03:40
Cut the "F" and you're getting there.
I'm no proponent of free trade either. I was just stating how the poster I was quoting could make it work in the manner that he wanted. If it were up to me the "F" would be replaced with a big "N" for "No".
Tremerica
10-02-2006, 03:41
Do you know what NAFTA stands for?
I'll give you a hint:
North
American
Free
Trade
Agreement
Now you might want to take a look at that top part, the first letter is kinda important. Unless these countries some how convince every geographer in the United States that South America and North America are the same place, then they are out of luck for that.
Perhaps a new treaty called AFTA could work.
Either they take it as NAFTA, or they don't take it at all. It's their choice.
Neu Leonstein
10-02-2006, 03:45
I'm no proponent of free trade either.
I am...I just don't think NAFTA has anything to do with free trade at all. The US is still rather busy changing rules, getting around them and all sorts of other stunts to keep its own protectionism alive, while Canada has to just sit down and accept it.
So if anything would be modelled like NAFTA, it would certainly not be free trade. Especially if agricultural produce was involved.
we should waive their debt and join in an American Union like the E.U. Maybe we could all have the same currency to, like the Americo which would thrash the Euro in the currency market.
Why don't we just pass the debt along? We do it all the time at lunch, around my office, when people are short on cash. Why can't it work for countries too?
If Peru owes us $10 million, and we owe the UN $10 million, why can't we just say, "OK, Peru... you pay the UN instead, and we'll call it all square." See? If only everything were that simple. ;)
People without names
10-02-2006, 21:35
wow, im pretty surprised about the results in here, in most NS forums there is a general liberal atmosphere. but not in here, atleast not yet. but anyways, i saw no.
Kossackja
12-02-2006, 14:19
Do you know what NAFTA stands for?
I'll give you a hint:
North
American
Free
Trade
Agreement
Now you might want to take a look at that top part, the first letter is kinda important. Unless these countries some how convince every geographer in the United States that South America and North America are the same place, then they are out of luck for that.
Perhaps a new treaty called AFTA could work.but turkey wants to join the EU, which stands for
European
Unioun
even though geographically they arent part of europe (except for a tiny part northwest of istanbul).
[NS]Sica
13-02-2006, 02:52
Forgiving debts is a terrible idea! Third world debt currently gives the developed world an incredible hold over the developing world. Instead of simply waiving the debts we should use debt relief as a carrot to ncourage economic and political reforms, rewarding reforms with partial debt relief.