Does Stalin really belong in the game?

[Grimz101]

Calm down with the insults before the moderators close the thread, and your arguements become void when you have to resort to personal attacks

 

[a4phantom]

What a sad and pathetic thing for you to lie about. Are you claiming that the message that now reads "

WHAT?

The one right below it says:

"May 17, 2008, 06:27 AM #345
Oldschooler88
Warlord
I want to delete this message. Not sure how..."

Obviously you figured out how to edit instead.

 

[a4phantom]

Calm down with the insults before the moderators close the thread, and your arguements become void when you have to resort to personal attacks

You're right.

 

[Wodan]

As for healthcare, I'm just saying ours should be like Canada's, or Frances and such.

I'm not sure that theirs are the "ideal"... they have some negatives. I do agree theirs is better than the U.S. though.

Herbert Hoover on the other hand, didn't give any socilized help to people that needed it. No, he believed in complete "free trade". When the country was in the great depression, he told the people of America to go to their churches, go to their charities, etc, and get money from them. Was this a coinsadence too?

"Too"? I didn't say that anything was a coincidence. I said it could have been a coincidence.

As for Hoover, I wouldn't know for sure. I can say unequivocably that it, too, could have been a coincidence. People study macroeconomics as a career. If it was an easy answer, then anybody in any old chat forum could say what it was.

And the fact that after the president following him made reforms, which helped the economy a bit, what that also a coinsadence? If not, what "other factors" played a role? Why is it that after the large military-low rich taxes of the first bush administration, the country was in not so good shape and we had a huge debt, and then the Clinton administration made it smaller and increased rich taxes, and we got a surplus? And right after that, the second bush did those same things and we are back in debt? Is everything I said in this post all one coinsadence? How many historical facts do I have to bring up for my point to be valid?

You could show an infinite number... it's not the number of items, it's demonstrating a causal relationship, which you have not even attempted to do.

If our next president decreases mindless military spending and increases the upper class taxes, and then we're out of debt and the economy is better again, will that once again all be a coinsadence?

It could be, yes.

I have been repainting my kitchen for three days earlier in the week. And, every day, my cat has gotten sick and thrown up on the floor. The immediate theory the comes to mind is that the cat was licking the paint or being affected by fumes or something. If we jumped to a conclusion it would be Post hoc, ergo propter hoc.

To demonstrate a causal relationship to the paint, I would need to somehow link the chemicals to my cat. By a blood test, or finding paint in her yuke, or something.

But jumping to a conclusion and saying flat out that it was due to the paint is simply poor logic. (Turns out, I had also changed her food to a new brand, last week. I'm suspecting it was the food, but am not sure.)

So, the paint theory could have been right. Could have been wrong. Could have been a coincidence. Without linking the two with a causal relationship, we will never know if it was the paint, or the food, or some third thing that is unknown.

Wodan

 

[a4phantom]

How's the cat now?

 

[caketastydelish]

Calm down with the insults before the moderators close the thread, and your arguements become void when you have to resort to personal attacks

I can't agree more, this guy needs to stop.

 

[Wodan]

How's the cat now?

She's fine, thanks. I made all that up. Though, I HAVE been painting the kitchen and she DOES throw up unless she has a specific kind of food.

Wodan

 

[Grimz101]

No one has agreed with me before
i feel all special
maybe i should work for the UN and be a treaty negociator ?

 

[caketastydelish]

No one has agreed with me before
i feel all special
maybe i should work for the UN and be a treaty negociator ?

Yes, absolutely.

 

[a4phantom]

What do you mean by that?

Should you wish to know more about the great Japanese economy, google "The Lost Decade" and growth rates since.

 

[WICKLC1]

a4phantom, you don't need to dislike people that you disagree with. Just because people have different opinions doesn't mean you have to insult them.

 

[a4phantom]

a4phantom, you don't need to dislike people that you disagree with. Just because people have different opinions doesn't mean you have to insult them.

I don't dislike or insult people because I disagree with them. I've disagreed with several people on this forum with neither response.

 

[NetGear]

I dont see anything wrong with adding whoever firaxis wants to add. Stalin is fine, hitler is fine. hitler's reign was kinda shor, but if they feel that they want to add, id personally not care.

Though adding Hitler is not a good for PR, since when you add anything to do w/ nazism its hard to not offend someone in someway. I mean, if you're having problems with stalin, imagine how many people would voice their discontent if hitler was added?

 

[Newbunkle]

I don't see anything wrong with adding Stalin since they already included Mao. Besides, he was in the first one, and its nice to have a few villains in the game.

 

[a4phantom]

I dont see anything wrong with adding whoever firaxis wants to add. Stalin is fine, hitler is fine. hitler's reign was kinda shor, but if they feel that they want to add, id personally not care.

Though adding Hitler is not a good for PR, since when you add anything to do w/ nazism its hard to not offend someone in someway. I mean, if you're having problems with stalin, imagine how many people would voice their discontent if hitler was added?

Right. The people who hate Hitler in a personal way are Civ's target audience. Those who may hate Stalin passionately probably aren't likely to buy Civ anyway.

On the merits, it's also questionable whether Hitler really was a leader up to the caliber of other choices. Yes he was dramatic and did a lot of damage in a short time, but his main achievement was leading his country to an overwhelming defeat that left it ruined, occupied and divided. Without putting a moral spin on it, he was a loser.

 

[Wodan]

On the merits, it's also questionable whether Hitler really was a leader up to the caliber of other choices. Yes he was dramatic and did a lot of damage in a short time, but his main achievement was leading his country to an overwhelming defeat that left it ruined, occupied and divided. Without putting a moral spin on it, he was a loser.

But couldn't the same be said of Montezuma and some others?

Wodan

 

[WICKLC1]

Although he is known for starting and losing WW2 and killing millions of people, Hitler did actually bring Germany out of the Great Depression and return the military to its former status. Also, he did conquer more of Europe and North Africa than anyone else, but like Napoleon, he is only remembered for losing.

 

[caketastydelish]

That wasn't a result of his policies, though.

To a certain degree, it was. For example, he thought Hernando Cortez was Quetzealcoatl. What a ******!

 

[Colonel]

Why is this a thread, Stalin was signifigant to world history therefor its reasonable to have him in a game which is solely revolveing around history. Would you have them take Stalin out of the history books just because he was violent, or take hitler out because of the holocaust, no you wouldn't because people learn from the mistakes of the past. In any case its a game its in there so quit whineing about it

 

[caketastydelish]

I'm not sure that theirs are the "ideal"... they have some negatives. I do agree theirs is better than the U.S. though.


"Too"? I didn't say that anything was a coincidence. I said it could have been a coincidence.

As for Hoover, I wouldn't know for sure. I can say unequivocably that it, too, could have been a coincidence. People study macroeconomics as a career. If it was an easy answer, then anybody in any old chat forum could say what it was.


You could show an infinite number... it's not the number of items, it's demonstrating a causal relationship, which you have not even attempted to do.


It could be, yes.

I have been repainting my kitchen for three days earlier in the week. And, every day, my cat has gotten sick and thrown up on the floor. The immediate theory the comes to mind is that the cat was licking the paint or being affected by fumes or something. If we jumped to a conclusion it would be Post hoc, ergo propter hoc.

To demonstrate a causal relationship to the paint, I would need to somehow link the chemicals to my cat. By a blood test, or finding paint in her yuke, or something.

But jumping to a conclusion and saying flat out that it was due to the paint is simply poor logic. (Turns out, I had also changed her food to a new brand, last week. I'm suspecting it was the food, but am not sure.)

So, the paint theory could have been right. Could have been wrong. Could have been a coincidence. Without linking the two with a causal relationship, we will never know if it was the paint, or the food, or some third thing that is unknown.

Wodan

I don't think it would be appropriate to compare that to what I said, but thats just me.