It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russia could destroy NATO ships in 20 mins: Admiral

page: 15
6
<< 12  13  14   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by SauberBMW
After reading this thread here's my opinion..

I hope Russia and the US kick the f*** out of each other. i hope that a nuclear bomb lands on the steps of Washington and Moscow. When will anybody realize that war is good for nothing. it costs lives, billions of dollars and for what


I think the vast majority on this thread does know that the common man will suffer the most in such a situation and that we are just discussing what if's and how too's.
If this upsets you too much i suggest you no longer take part in these threads or just occasionally remind everyone that wars aren't fun and that the outbreak of war normally puts paid to current doctrines.


Ohh, we have the better military!!

BS!!!!!!!

instead of spending billions on military, why not on medicine. A cure for cancer, Aids, HIV etc etc


Those things are certainly more important but if a society can not protect it's gains from militaristic foreigners it's not worth pursuing such lofty ideals. First erect your forts and convince likely enemies that you would be willing to pay the price of freedom and then invest in making that freedom worth while for those defending it.


or how bout farming techniques where we can grow food in 3rd world countries so no one starves


Third world countries used to be able to feed themselves before they were forced to start planting tobacco and cotton to pay debts saddled on them by heavily armed western powers. The third world could look after itself it others with guns were not stomping them into early graves.


did anybody think about that while you Stupid patriotic Americans and Russians talk about who has the better weapons .


Yes, some do and frankly you will be lucky to find one Russian for every five hundred Americans.



No because you guys don't care. F*** Bush and F*** Putin and F*** every weapon ever developed


Well we do care and these weapons wont go away so we best arm and prepare ourselves without losing focus as to what we are trying to protect from western or other imperialist.

Stellar




posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 08:19 PM
link   
August was a month when the children were still off from school and trying to squeeze in the last of their summer before school started, except the US, UK backed Georgia decided to sacrifice countless thousands in their genocide. I could not believe that it was allowed to go down, allowed, hell it was ordered by our corrupt cabal. But their attempt to instigate Russian and try to paint them black, surround them with nuclear power, and go back to their main target, Iran, seems to have failed. But that didn't bring back all those beautiful children.

Now we see Russia in South America, and responding to the attempt to corner them. Thank goodness there was someone there to block the US, UK world domination plans. And from the most unlikely source.



posted on Sep, 29 2008 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Major Discrepancy
The Major would like to ask Admiral Eduard Baltin the last time the Russian/Soviet Navy was able to successfully engage a foreign power in a naval battle?


Like the Japanese, Major, sometimes what you havent seen comes back and has the final word.

Let Peace Reign.



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 05:26 AM
link   
reply to post by StellarX
 


What your link to productivity fails to admit is that Norways productivity comes from huge petroleum reserves found along their Arctic Coast. Only a few counties in Belguim and France out produce the avager productivity of the entire U.S. population. Productivity can be measured, and it is measured regularly, and the U.S. out produces all other nations in hourly output, except Norway for the reason mentioned above.

www.nytimes.com...

www.finfacts.ie...


What?s more, the report also shows that the productivity gap between the US and most other developed economies continued to widen. The acceleration of productivity growth in the US has outpaced that of many other developed economies: With US$ 63,885 of value added per person employed in 2006, the United States was followed at a considerable distance by Ireland (US$ 55,986), Luxembourg (US$ 55,641), Belgium (US$ 55,235) and France (US$ 54,609).

However, Americans work more hours per year than workers in most other developed economies. This is why, measured as value added per hour worked, Norway has the highest labour productivity level (US$ 37.99), followed by the United States (US$ 35.63) and France (US$ 35.08).


Here is a decent discussion of the subject.

www.marginalrevolution.com...

Well, out of time.

I'll dig some data up on U.S. steel workers. You can find this information easily enough yourself if you were interested, and if you like history, you would enjoy what you found.



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
What your link to productivity fails to admit is that Norways productivity comes from huge petroleum reserves found along their Arctic Coast.


This has nothing to do with oil! Do you really think that this productivity is a measure of how wealthy a nation is in resources? If so why are the Japanese productive at all?


Only a few counties in Belguim and France out produce the avager productivity of the entire U.S. population.


Actually the US population is supposedly more productive since they work so many more hours but that's the truth for all manner of slaves and hardly the choice of the average worker. You are however wrong in claiming that per hour statistics are only true for some parts of France and Norway. Those statistics are for the countries!


Productivity can be measured, and it is measured regularly, and the U.S. out produces all other nations in hourly output, except Norway for the reason mentioned above.


It was a nonsensical reason based on pure ignorance of the methods being employed. The US does not produce all other countries based on a hourly standard.


www.nytimes.com...

www.finfacts.ie...


They mention Norway to be a oil nation in the same way that george Bush mentioned Iraq when he talked about 9-11. Fool me once shame on you; fool me twice shame on me? What does oil have to do with it?



What?s more, the report also shows that the productivity gap between the US and most other developed economies continued to widen. The acceleration of productivity growth in the US has outpaced that of many other developed economies: With US$ 63,885 of value added per person employed in 2006, the United States was followed at a considerable distance by Ireland (US$ 55,986), Luxembourg (US$ 55,641), Belgium (US$ 55,235) and France (US$ 54,609).


Yes, because of France wages are higher with far more benefits. Labor is productive but it's not nearly as badly exploited as it is back in the good US of A which results in corporations being able to extract a great deal of value from their workers. Basically this is nonsense as there are no workers that create larger incomes for their bosses than those of the third world sweat ships where they make shirts for seven - ten Us cents to be sold back in the US for seven dollars.



However, Americans work more hours per year than workers in most other developed economies. This is why, measured as value added per hour worked, Norway has the highest labour productivity level (US$ 37.99), followed by the United States (US$ 35.63) and France (US$ 35.08).


Yes and next you will argued, based on the article, that Americans do this because they just LOVE working long hours and creating more profit for the bosses.


Here is a decent discussion of the subject.

www.marginalrevolution.com...


There is nothing special about it and basically a few are trying to correct the general ignorance in the same way i am trying to do here.
The US unemployment numbers are no lower than that of the 'old west' and labor mobility is about as static as anywhere else. The largest disparity is simply in how massively inflated US GDP numbers is and how this is employed arrange a facade of prosperity that does not exist. US worked wages have been static since the 70's; not something that is true in western Europe.


Since 1975, practically all the gains in household income have gone to the top 20% of households.

cia.gov...



Jobs data don't count the down-and-out
Williams starts by discussing the headline economic data: "Real unemployment right now -- figured the way that the average person thinks of unemployment, meaning figured the way it was estimated back during the Great Depression -- is running about 12%. Real CPI right now is running at about 8%. And the real GDP probably is in contraction." (By "real," he means calculating the data the way they used to be calculated, not as inflation-adjusted.)

He then explains how the employment data are compiled, noting that 5 million chronically unemployed people are not included in the statistics. In fact, there are seven or eight different employment statistics. One called U-3 is the official one. The broadest one, U-6, currently shows unemployment as running around 8.4%. As he explains, the one that's the most historically consistent is running around 12%.

moneycentral.msn.com...



Well, out of time.


If only you would use this time to read instead of type!


I'll dig some data up on U.S. steel workers. You can find this information easily enough yourself if you were interested, and if you like history, you would enjoy what you found.


I like history but normally that parts which isn't hopelessly misrepresented by those who do their absolutely best to always put the US in the best light.

Stellar

[edit on 30-9-2008 by StellarX]



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 10:06 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 05:57 AM
link   
reply to post by StellarX
 


I hadn't bothered with this thread for some time, being that there are much more interesting threads to post on, but someone linked to this thread as proof I was wrong, so Here I am responding.

The U.S. leads all other nations in productivity per hour, except Norway. The U.S. out produces France, and that is with a U.S. population of close to 300,000, which means that when you calculate out put per average, the U.S. must be that much better. If you were to look at California alone, the productivity per hour destroys France, and the major production areas of the U.S. all out do France.

This is what the link I provided clearly states,


This is why, measured as value added per hour worked, Norway has the highest labour productivity level (US$ 37.99), followed by the United States (US$ 35.63) and France (US$ 35.08).


as value added per hour worked

Norways current high productivity is due to oil production. This is well documented, but doing research on your own seems to be something you are incapable of doing. You make all these claims, but provide no links that back them up. Even the articles you provide show that you are wrong.

Here is the ILO report on hourly production, and why countries out produce other countries. Notice that technology is one of the key reasons. Also notice, Russia is not at the top.

www.ilo.org...


This is why, measured as value added per hour worked, Norway has the highest labour productivity level (US$ 37.99), followed by the United States (US$ 35.63) and France (US$ 35.08).

Increase in productivity is mainly the result of firms better combining capital, labour and technology. A lack of investment in people (training and skills) as well as equipment and technology can lead to an underutilization of the labour potential in the world.


Both article clearly state that the U.S. outproduces France, and Russia, who are talking about, isn't even in the running.

Admittedly, I am having problems finding articles about the development of the U.S. steel industry. There used to be several available in the web.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 12  13  14   >>

log in

join