Message from @JogaFlame
Discord ID: 493519985466146828
But a nation doesn't serve or disserve people, the government does that. The people and their culture are what makes up a nation.
So the people are a separate entity from the nation itself.
No.
I'm not trying to antagonize you. I'm just pointing out that you're attempting to divorce the people from something the people themselves are.
@Zayan Watchel Except it does
I don't understand what doesn't make sense about it.
"But the all people are part of the economy."
Yes, should those people expect the economy to conform to them, meaning should it be built around their culture and society, or, should their society be built around the economy?
@Zayan Watchel
If they can exist without a nation
Then they have to be a separate entity.
As for the nation comparison, which is actually even much easier to understand, should the people be allowed to forge the nation? Should the nation forge the people?
Because the question essentially amounts to: "Should people serve people."
As if they weren't the people wouldn't exist anymore.
The economy serves the people who serve the economy. The nation forges the people who forge the nation.
The nation *is the people,* and their culture.
They are the same thing.
People forge nations, if it's not for people the nation wouldn't exist.
These questions all amount to: "Should people serve people, or should people serve people?"
@Zayan Watchel I already stated what it boils down to
"should those people expect the economy to conform to them, meaning should it be built around their culture and society, or, should their society be built around the economy? "
If you try hard enough, you can break it down to what you just did, yes
But it's going to take some effort to make such an interpretation
Well, if the Nation stops existing, do the people stop existing?
As in,you'd willfully have to make it
Not really. The nation is a group of people and their culture. The economy is people attempting to use scarce resources.
People should try to work together, and support friendly competition.
To keep the cost of general goods down at a price that is affordable to those who need them.
They're both people. So asking who should serve who is asking "Should people serve people, or vice versa?"
While offering some luxuries to the middle class.
alright then
It's not that important anyways
This question went backwards.
The question is unanswerable and doesn't make any sense.
Well then don't answer it and wait for another one
It's like oil based economy, should a government prop the economy up on oil, or try to put programs in place to diversify?
None. Let the free market deal with it.
I explained what it meant above, and if you don't like it, that's your opinion
Well, should you just let the domestic industry suffer and die out of it can't cope?
Just calling my statement, "opinion", is not a rebuttal, but whatever.
It's not a rebuttal
I wasn't trying to refute you
I was saying I can
I can't change your mind
which isn't a bad thing