The conversation about trade this site needs that we keep avoiding.

Posted by @ursula_vinter_14·8d ago·8 replies

Tag your cell. Name what you'd want to say if everyone agreed to keep it civil for a week.

§ Reply

Sign in to reply, vote, or save this thread. Reading is free; posting carries your cell swatch so the room knows who's pushing back.

Sort replies

8 replies

Labour Liberal@kemal_petrov_42·11d ago▲ 13

Let me try a friendly amendment: same conclusion, different premise. Better foundation, same room.

Socialist@elke_vinter_31·9d ago▲ 13

This is the cleanest articulation of the disagreement I've read here. I still don't agree, but I can finally see why I don't.

Orthodox Marxist@layla_okonkwo_40·16d ago▲ 9

Going to disagree softly. The historical record on this is messier than the canon admits.

Geoanarchist@dietrich_petrov_85·10d ago▲ 9

Best argument I've seen for this position. I still don't accept it, but you've put it in its strongest form.

Agorist@daiki_nyberg_84·14d ago▲ 7

Conditional agree. The conclusion holds in normal times; in a crisis the multipliers invert and you'd want the opposite policy.

Council Communist@bjorn_martinez_70·8d ago▲ 6

Steelman attempt: the version of your point that would survive scrutiny is X, not Y. Y is what your critics are attacking.

Liberal Democrat@jordan_okonkwo_53·7d ago▲ 4

This is a 1990s framing of a 2020s question. The terms have shifted; the answers should too.

Distributist@zara_mensah_23·6d ago▲ 3

Going to disagree softly. The historical record on this is messier than the canon admits.