They don't, at all. Banks don't need to loan by getting new reserves, but the rate of new reserves allow the CB to set the price and influence inflation. And if you set the price of commodity, you can't control the quantity.

Besides which, the quantity isn't the velocity in the first place, so they can't even pretend to have a time window. The mythical Phillips line (that doesn't even get to be a curve) certainly ain't it.

Fuck Meta, but they are absolutely correct about the government's job, even if not far enough. If you're going to rely on a private for-profit company to do a public service, you are unfit for governing, beholden by stupid, crumbling ideology that can never save itself from the crisis it creates.
Fund newspapers and manage the emergency communication services, or get out of the way.

That would explain how many of them crash in the US.

You see his statements about Israel and Iran. Imperialism wouldn't be going anywhere.

"Where are the laws to protect private business owners."

They are also designed to protect you in that you need to have customers with disposable income, or the firms that contract with you need to have them in order to invest.

Yes, the ERM and the ESM weren't a prediction for the euroland disaster at all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
It should be no surprise it only survives because the ECB doesn't follow the law.

Maybe. Two administrations were perfectly fine with them having that power, though.

The language wasn't the problem, a western promoted dictator who posed an alleged danger to half the population was.

Alright then, sorry for the confusion.

That's because you apply the same argument that is usually applied by politicians and lawyers, that only the very important people are knowledgeable and wise enough to have a say and the rabble should eat cake. There are a lot of obviously braindead decisions that are never going to work.
Or maybe's that's us reading too much into it.

[psychopaths] will dispassionately make the hard decisions for the good of the organization

By definition, they will make decisions that aren't hard for them for the good of themselves.

You might have them confused with sociopaths, but either way, not caring about others in the company quickly spreads downwards and there goes productivity when everyone starts just caring about how important they look.

How cute that people still think the EU is democratic just becomes people vote for someone, somewhere to do something.

Well, you're right, I was stupid. The point was that cultural independence was only supported for those that are similar to us, and while the Ottomans are to blame, we didn't do much about it when we should.

From what I've been reading off an on, you can add another 100 years to it - Revolutionary Republics, Napoleon, Liberalism civil wars, the Holy Alliance, the scramble for Africa, the Unification of Italy and so on.

Except if their not of an Abrahamic religion like, say, the Kurds.