After reading twice and meditating a bit, I think your text is more valuable as an example of a radical and polemical point of view than as a reliable source of information or a coherent economic analysis. Your arguments are based on emotion and hyperbole rather than logic and evidence. You should take life slowly, time does not stand still and we become obsolete very quickly.
Sort: Trending
Most assertions are speculative opinions unsupported by data. Reducing complex economic and geopolitical issues to simplistic narratives of good guys vs. bad guys (RoW vs. US) is not objectivity. The use of extreme language (‘terrorist’, ‘nukes’) undermines your credibility and distances you from serious debate. There are clear contradictions: you claim that the US economy is fragile because of its global dependence, but its collapse would not harm the rest of the world. I see the discourse as constructed to confirm a strongly anti-US view, not to explore an issue in a balanced way.