d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Face It (denmark Here)
Prev1234Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 4,157
Joined: Dec 22 2004
Gold: 1,217.00
Feb 17 2026 03:15am
That's not true. You pay to maintain the status quo, as I said it is a welfare state. You do not invest meaningfully into development. Fishing makes up 90% of their exports and it's nowhere near enough to sustain them, they need you to fund all of their public services. If they had money to start mining they quickly would not need you.

Obviously you have good reasons to not invest in them, but you shouldn't act so self-righteous about it.


Why do you even bother making these arguments? You have absolutely zero knowledge of the culture or the history.
Yes it's a welfare state just like Denmark, France, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Finland, ect ect ect ect ect is. That's not derogatory like you probably mean it. It simply means that the state takes care of its citizens. Nothing self-righteous about that. It's how it works in multiple countries across the world.
How we invest into Greenland is indeed meaningful and it's not just in infrastructure it's in it's people. Something that seems lost on you.



Member
Posts: 28,970
Joined: Jun 20 2007
Gold: 34.51
Feb 17 2026 09:17am
That's not true. You pay to maintain the status quo, as I said it is a welfare state. You do not invest meaningfully into development. Fishing makes up 90% of their exports and it's nowhere near enough to sustain them, they need you to fund all of their public services. If they had money to start mining they quickly would not need you.

Obviously you have good reasons to not invest in them, but you shouldn't act so self-righteous about it.


Mining does virtually nothing for such economies. Typically the skillsets do not exist aside from labour only positions and haul drivers, often which are filled first and foremost with immigrants. Then you have the other issue of people have had their living paid for via social systems and are the marginal life increase from a minimally paid job is not significant enough to engage in employment. Those who are working, are already working. An when you provide social welfare without any requirement such as your kids attendance at school, well it becomes an entitlement. I find it amazing we have no issue having targets for employees to push performance or attendance requirements but when it comes to social welfare its here is your monthly cheque for food and here if your social housing. Enjoy.

Saying we're going to pump X billion into a mine for mineral extraction means nothing when it comes to actual investment into community infrastructure, or meaningful change. The work will be tendered to companies like North American Construction, who may be required to find an Inuk partner, but that is typically so piss poorly regulated that most companies just partner with an individual Inuk, incorporate, make it 100% Inuit owned, but then have all by 0.0x% of revenue flow back to the Op Co. Or they toss them a truck or side by side annually. Meanwhile their topline on the year is a few hundred million. Often mines are also in remote places and the most a town gets is to be a laydown area off of sealift.

Point being, its likely to remain a welfare state if the US does or does not invest. I have lived the bulk of my entire life in these places and seen the biggest names in mining come and go, and nothing changes for the communities. I always have a good laugh when some new mining exec comes along to speak and say we are spending x billion contributing to the GDP here, while everyone watching still has to shit in a bucket or go smash ice on the lake for drinking water because town itself does not even have enough water and sewer trucks to service it.

So I understand the resistance. But I think it could be different. I'd cut deals that require direct community infrastructure investment that statistically contributed the highest to high school graduation. Greenland is already leaps and bounds ahead , think they might be pushing a 40% grade 12 grad rate, which is higher than us. But you have to get that figure higher. Their social welfare system also needs a significant revamp just like ours that creates motivation to get your kids into school and keep them there.

Id personally revamp the social systems to have the money tied to attendance and school performance for those that have children and fight other meaningful targets for those that do not.

But here we are currently and those social systems have become entitlements that contribute to the never-ending cycle of poverty. A bunch of USA investment isn't going to do a thing to break that cycle if its just another mine or remote military bases I am afraid, IF current social systems are also not totally re-worked.

This post was edited by SBD on Feb 17 2026 09:18am
Member
Posts: 92,890
Joined: Dec 31 2007
Gold: 2,299.94
Feb 17 2026 10:58am
Why do you even bother making these arguments? You have absolutely zero knowledge of the culture or the history.
Yes it's a welfare state just like Denmark, France, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Finland, ect ect ect ect ect is. That's not derogatory like you probably mean it. It simply means that the state takes care of its citizens. Nothing self-righteous about that. It's how it works in multiple countries across the world.
How we invest into Greenland is indeed meaningful and it's not just in infrastructure it's in it's people. Something that seems lost on you.


if i let me wife define what "taking care of our family" meant without pushback we'd be broke inside of a year. first comes the spending, then comes the borrowing, then the collapse. have fun being surrounded by people who wont take no for an answer once it does.
Member
Posts: 8,882
Joined: Apr 23 2010
Gold: 9,721.64
Feb 17 2026 11:09am
If the U.S invaded Denmark today, we'd own greenland and denmark by tomorrow. Don't kid yourself.

This is all a geo-political game for politicians to get what they want. Trump sold a massive payload of military equipment to you guys to defend Greenland. His plans have plans and the mans a business genius with the richest man in the world Elon in his pocket to advise him.
Member
Posts: 8,882
Joined: Apr 23 2010
Gold: 9,721.64
Feb 17 2026 11:15am
if i let me wife define what "taking care of our family" meant without pushback we'd be broke inside of a year. first comes the spending, then comes the borrowing, then the collapse. have fun being surrounded by people who wont take no for an answer once it does.


You're arguing with a hyper liberal. Normal people in the middle of even a little left aren't as silly as this.
A wellfare state is an objectively bad thing, especially if the state uses all of it's resources to take care of it's citizens without actually producing, working or making things. When you just take, take, take eventually nothing is left.
EXACTLY how Thesnipa said.
First comes the spending
Then the lending
Then the burning, plundering, and starving.
Member
Posts: 16,000
Joined: Dec 27 2019
Gold: 69.69
Feb 17 2026 01:01pm
I'll buy it with owner finance @ 10% interest. Take the deal Greenland while you can.
Member
Posts: 17,248
Joined: Dec 5 2007
Gold: 2,087.80
Feb 17 2026 02:17pm
Mining does virtually nothing for such economies. Typically the skillsets do not exist aside from labour only positions and haul drivers, often which are filled first and foremost with immigrants. Then you have the other issue of people have had their living paid for via social systems and are the marginal life increase from a minimally paid job is not significant enough to engage in employment. Those who are working, are already working. An when you provide social welfare without any requirement such as your kids attendance at school, well it becomes an entitlement. I find it amazing we have no issue having targets for employees to push performance or attendance requirements but when it comes to social welfare its here is your monthly cheque for food and here if your social housing. Enjoy.

Saying we're going to pump X billion into a mine for mineral extraction means nothing when it comes to actual investment into community infrastructure, or meaningful change. The work will be tendered to companies like North American Construction, who may be required to find an Inuk partner, but that is typically so piss poorly regulated that most companies just partner with an individual Inuk, incorporate, make it 100% Inuit owned, but then have all by 0.0x% of revenue flow back to the Op Co. Or they toss them a truck or side by side annually. Meanwhile their topline on the year is a few hundred million. Often mines are also in remote places and the most a town gets is to be a laydown area off of sealift.

Point being, its likely to remain a welfare state if the US does or does not invest. I have lived the bulk of my entire life in these places and seen the biggest names in mining come and go, and nothing changes for the communities. I always have a good laugh when some new mining exec comes along to speak and say we are spending x billion contributing to the GDP here, while everyone watching still has to shit in a bucket or go smash ice on the lake for drinking water because town itself does not even have enough water and sewer trucks to service it.

So I understand the resistance. But I think it could be different. I'd cut deals that require direct community infrastructure investment that statistically contributed the highest to high school graduation. Greenland is already leaps and bounds ahead , think they might be pushing a 40% grade 12 grad rate, which is higher than us. But you have to get that figure higher. Their social welfare system also needs a significant revamp just like ours that creates motivation to get your kids into school and keep them there.

Id personally revamp the social systems to have the money tied to attendance and school performance for those that have children and fight other meaningful targets for those that do not.

But here we are currently and those social systems have become entitlements that contribute to the never-ending cycle of poverty. A bunch of USA investment isn't going to do a thing to break that cycle if its just another mine or remote military bases I am afraid, IF current social systems are also not totally re-worked.


Idk about all of this. I grew up in a remote community and I haven’t lived there in a long time but I visit fairly frequently. About ten years ago an old gold mine that shut down in the 60s-70s opened back up. Basically everyone I grew up with who was never going to leave and isn’t on drugs works there now and is making 2-3 times as much as they were previously. They also fly people in to work, but they’re incentivized to hire locals because it’s so much cheaper and more reliable. The population has risen by over 20%, many people that left have returned.

There are more restaurants, more small businesses and houses are being built. When I lived there a lot of people did renovations but I only ever saw one house built—a house that had burnt down being rebuilt with insurance money. The town was long past it’s prime when I was young, there were plenty of cheap houses you could buy and fix up.

I remember there was a poster on the bank when I was a kid that had houses for sale on it. Houses for under $20,000. It’s not because life was so affordable back then, it was because the town was slowly dying. People moved out, nobody moved in.

That’s not the case any more. Now if you want a house you may need to build.

I agree with the part about all social systems needing overhauled tho.
Member
Posts: 28,970
Joined: Jun 20 2007
Gold: 34.51
Feb 17 2026 02:32pm
Idk about all of this. I grew up in a remote community and I haven’t lived there in a long time but I visit fairly frequently. About ten years ago an old gold mine that shut down in the 60s-70s opened back up. Basically everyone I grew up with who was never going to leave and isn’t on drugs works there now and is making 2-3 times as much as they were previously. They also fly people in to work, but they’re incentivized to hire locals because it’s so much cheaper and more reliable. The population has risen by over 20%, many people that left have returned.

There are more restaurants, more small businesses and houses are being built. When I lived there a lot of people did renovations but I only ever saw one house built—a house that had burnt down being rebuilt with insurance money. The town was long past it’s prime when I was young, there were plenty of cheap houses you could buy and fix up.

I remember there was a poster on the bank when I was a kid that had houses for sale on it. Houses for under $20,000. It’s not because life was so affordable back then, it was because the town was slowly dying. People moved out, nobody moved in.

That’s not the case any more. Now if you want a house you may need to build.

I agree with the part about all social systems needing overhauled tho.


There is truth in hiring locals when its close to town and skill sets exist. Most northern deposits are not close to towns and as result its not cheaper, nor more reliable. You have the odd one, say Meliadin for example. The result is an air charter, that hits multiple northern communities usually or workers have to travel from said community via air to the nearest major air-port when all the other mine workers are flying from and as a result its actually more expensive to use local hires. And the only time the air-charter option makes sense is if there's enough local workers in said communities, for instance ours right now is on a 3 week charter rotation. On reliability, we track no-shows for our companies at the airports, its not non-northern workers skipping flights because they got boozed up, its local hires. They get some money, they hit the bar since all our towns are dry and they miss their flight.

The north is an animal on its own, its nothing like the oilfields or Fort-Mac which I don't even consider northern. Inuks have very different values and unfortunately the amount of social assistance given without any performance requirement has really broken the will to work. Get your money from a quick rotation, quit job.

The only incentive is if the land-holder and subsurface rights older which is typically a band or inuit organization, forces mines to have hiring quotas via some workforce %. Even then though its often cheaper for mines to just pay out the penalty than loss of productivity using a non skilled workforce that just repeatedly quits on you.

I love my home, but I am not blind to the damage that's been done and even I have started to toss my hands in the air in frustration, the amount of free or paid training, the hundreds of job positions created, nothing I do on a daily basis seems to actually do anything to break this cycle.

I am eventually going to jump ship since after the past decade of seeing zero meaningful progress have concluded the only way to beat this thing is to give up completely on anyone 20 years and older. You have to fix the kids and convivence them they do not want to grow up to be their parents in social housing on social assistance. Need to build fitness facilities that have mentors for kids to idolize rather than their own parents shit life. Were currently pushing an average of a grade 6 literacy rate and a 30% graduation rate for men, of which is basically a freebie graduation rate because if you were to grade it based on a southern curriculum no one would pass.

All this to say, if life's shit an unlikely to change and remain a welfare state, people would probably rather be that under the Danes rather than the USA. So I understand it.

Don't even get me going on the level of protest against economic development in the north. My god how long did Baffinlands hearings go only to have Canada shoot it down in the end, 5 years or so? Expansion declined. The runways were blocked, everything and its the highest non -gov GDP producer in that Canadian Territory and even the MP was doing everything she could to get rid of it. Part of that is entitlement, we don't need work!

is in here. The AUS is all mining. Ingedenous must have figured out how to better take advantage there i'd think. I don't know how land rights work in AUS but presumably you guys have Impact Benefit Agreements in place for land access.

This post was edited by SBD on Feb 17 2026 02:42pm
Member
Posts: 21,958
Joined: Jun 14 2012
Gold: 331,454.58
Feb 17 2026 03:22pm
You all seem to have taken the derail bait, talking about 'welfare'. :rolleyes:

The investments in Greenland that USA would strategically utilize will be backed by the Military Industrial Complex.

Denmark can't provide this level cash flow or security.

If the people of Greenland don't come out on top from these discussions. Than they will be, In trump's words, "stupid people".

This post was edited by Mondain on Feb 17 2026 03:25pm
Member
Posts: 17,248
Joined: Dec 5 2007
Gold: 2,087.80
Feb 17 2026 04:16pm
There is truth in hiring locals when its close to town and skill sets exist. Most northern deposits are not close to towns and as result its not cheaper, nor more reliable. You have the odd one, say Meliadin for example. The result is an air charter, that hits multiple northern communities usually or workers have to travel from said community via air to the nearest major air-port when all the other mine workers are flying from and as a result its actually more expensive to use local hires. And the only time the air-charter option makes sense is if there's enough local workers in said communities, for instance ours right now is on a 3 week charter rotation. On reliability, we track no-shows for our companies at the airports, its not non-northern workers skipping flights because they got boozed up, its local hires. They get some money, they hit the bar since all our towns are dry and they miss their flight.

The north is an animal on its own, its nothing like the oilfields or Fort-Mac which I don't even consider northern. Inuks have very different values and unfortunately the amount of social assistance given without any performance requirement has really broken the will to work. Get your money from a quick rotation, quit job.

The only incentive is if the land-holder and subsurface rights older which is typically a band or inuit organization, forces mines to have hiring quotas via some workforce %. Even then though its often cheaper for mines to just pay out the penalty than loss of productivity using a non skilled workforce that just repeatedly quits on you.

I love my home, but I am not blind to the damage that's been done and even I have started to toss my hands in the air in frustration, the amount of free or paid training, the hundreds of job positions created, nothing I do on a daily basis seems to actually do anything to break this cycle.

I am eventually going to jump ship since after the past decade of seeing zero meaningful progress have concluded the only way to beat this thing is to give up completely on anyone 20 years and older. You have to fix the kids and convivence them they do not want to grow up to be their parents in social housing on social assistance. Need to build fitness facilities that have mentors for kids to idolize rather than their own parents shit life. Were currently pushing an average of a grade 6 literacy rate and a 30% graduation rate for men, of which is basically a freebie graduation rate because if you were to grade it based on a southern curriculum no one would pass.

All this to say, if life's shit an unlikely to change and remain a welfare state, people would probably rather be that under the Danes rather than the USA. So I understand it.

Don't even get me going on the level of protest against economic development in the north. My god how long did Baffinlands hearings go only to have Canada shoot it down in the end, 5 years or so? Expansion declined. The runways were blocked, everything and its the highest non -gov GDP producer in that Canadian Territory and even the MP was doing everything she could to get rid of it. Part of that is entitlement, we don't need work!

^Plaguefear is in here. The AUS is all mining. Ingedenous must have figured out how to better take advantage there i'd think. I don't know how land rights work in AUS but presumably you guys have Impact Benefit Agreements in place for land access.


You may be right. The town I’m talking about, although it is remote it isn’t that remote. Locals drive to work. The guys I know that work there mostly started as rock truck drivers but most have accepted training initiatives and have moved up. Maybe it wouldn’t work this way in Greenland, I don’t know.

But the tax money would still be collected by Greenland. It would still ensure their independence from Denmark, even if the locals refused to do the work themselves.

I’m not even advocating the USA taking over Greenland. It’s more of a hassle than it’s worth, as I said in a different thread a fully developed Greenland will still be worth less than Home Depot. I just don’t understand why Denmark is pretending to want them while refusing to help them develop.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1234Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll