*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[OngBonga]

Combine harvester..

I don't have an argument so I'll say something random.

What generally happens in these situations is the more dominant country suffers economically, it just suffers less than the less dominant country.

Are you an economist?

It's like a boxing match. You can beat up someone smaller than you, but you don't get their health given to you. You still end up with bruises.

Another piss poor analogy.

I have a better idea of North American culture than you, that's how.

You may well do. But then again you might be making assumptions that are not correct. When did you last spend time in North America? And does a Canadian understand American culture? I wouldn't pretend to know more about the French than, say, spoon, just because I was born in a nation closer to France than he was.

Take it to the 'arrrruggghggh!' thread, Brexit Boy.

You know, you haven't once even tried to answer this point, and that's because you're incapable of doing so. You're of the opinion than perpetual uncertainty is worse than Brexit itself. It's not. I mean, given a straight up choice... do we vote on this every 3-4 years, or remain in the EU, remaining would be far more preferable. Uncertainty is bad for business, bad for society. Business cannot adapt to new economic landscapes if that landscape might change again quickly.

If you're going to promote another referendum after 3 years based on "people change their minds", then in order to be intellectually honest and consistent, you have to accept that we'll need another vote after another few years, regardless of the result. And then another one after another few years. That is what I mean by perpetual uncertainty. It simply is not an option. If you sincerely think it is, then you're living in cloud cuckoo land.

[Poopadoop]

I don't have an argument so I'll say something random.

You: Why don't you like Trump's immigration policy?

Me: Among other things, he said Mexico would pay for the Wall. That's just dumb.

You: Trump didn't mean Mexico would actually pay for the Wall directly, just 'economically'.

Me: What do you mean 'economically'? How is that even possible? Oh and btw, Trump tried to make Mexico pay for the Wall. Here's the proof.

You: That's politics. It's all about image.

Me: Combine harvester.

You: You answered my non-sequitur with another non-sequitur!

Another piss poor analogy.

Explain how it's wrong. Economics is not a zero-sum game. Better yet, answer the original question and explain how one country can make another 'pay economically' for its civil construction project.

You may well do. But then again you might be making assumptions that are not correct. When did you last spend time in North America? And does a Canadian understand American culture?

Canadians and Americans have a similar culture. Canadians are exposed to American media. So yeah, I definitely understand American culture better than you.

I wouldn't pretend to know more about the French than, say, spoon, just because I was born in a nation closer to France than he was.

If you don't know more about France than a random American you must be pretty clueless. And, neither he nor Mojo has jumped up to say I'm wrong. So maybe I am better informed than you.

You know, you haven't once even tried to answer this point, and that's because you're incapable of doing so.

Maybe I don't see any value in talking to someone who doesn't want to listen, but would rather just keep saying the same things over and over and over ad nauseum. Like I said, it's boring.