Jack
Forum
>Let me see if I understand, it is wrong for the US to purchase goods and services on the open market?
Yes.
>>By Flagg (Thursday, 10 May 2007 00:13)
@ third world countries fight for US dollars
I'm sure third world dictators love the US dollars (or any money), but the people hardly (being careful here) benefit from it, do they? Or can you point out any country in the third world where all is happy, healthy and peaceful? Quite the opposite I dare say.
The raw materials are being purchased by slavery of the habitants and the only party that benefits from it is the West. Not just the US, the West in general.
Calling the US anything bad would be calling the kettle black. The Dutch have gained quite a reputation through history, so have the British for that matter.
But that doesn't make present oppression and exploitation of the third world any better. Does it.
For something else - I recently learned that the melting of the polecaps is actually good! For there are huge spots approachable now with a treasure of raw materials, spots that were earlier covered with ice. Hip Hip Hooray! F*ck the planet, we can continue our luxury live style for a few more centuries. Perhaps with wet feet and the loss of a few polar bears but I'm sure we can find a way to live with that.
>>By Lynn (Thursday, 10 May 2007 12:07)
"the open market" with reference to international trade strikes me as a idealised abstraction used by economists lv2bs. Perhaps you could name the actual commodity unaffected by duties, tariffs, quotas, subsidies, favourable terms offered to a countries govt to its own hi-tech industries and agriculture, restrictions on movement of labour etc etc?
>>By planet ear (Thursday, 10 May 2007 16:24)
Wet feet, loss of polar bears and more skin cancer and asthma, and presumably overcrowding eventually.
>>By Flagg (Thursday, 10 May 2007 18:36)
Yeah but why should we give a damn about the polar ice caps melting because of our irresponsible usage of fossile fuels - I mean I'm going to be dead in 50 years time - what does it matter to me ??? ;)
Lynn is spot on. The West will give third world governments funding on the basis that they'll get something back - in raw materials, goods etc. I know that the IMF has leaned on governments to privatise industries - so that International Companies can step in & make a killing. Many citizens were not warned whatsoever - so there was a surge of unemployment & power being cut from people's home due to the fact that the energy grid WAS nationalised, and now privately owned. Only when the government agreed to privatise major industries would they give them funding etc..... & in some cases 30% of the money HAD to be spent on a pop video promoting privatisation.
I just bet the people in the third world just LOVE America for all the aid they're giving....how much again does it cost to keep the American army (marines) in Iraq per day ????
Wow, the Prime Minister of Britain is now Gordon Brown.......
>>By Tchock (Thursday, 10 May 2007 23:48)
Or, just maybe, someone else who is pretty much indistinguishable from Gordon Brown.
Our water supply vanished for the last two days. Thames Water are a bunch of incompetents and narcissists. Frankly the idea that water, the most precious substance in existence, should be distributed by a private company is appalling to me.
I'll be interested to see L2R's response to your post Tchock.
>>By Flagg (Friday, 11 May 2007 01:12)
Thames Water own half the public water supplies in Britain - no matter how far away from London you get. They actually own the sewage-works in Edinburgh..... that malfunctioned & let a hell of a lot of sewage into the Firth of Forth.....
Privatisation..... but you gotta love Thatcher.
Although I think the best incompentancy on the part of a private company hired in the public sector has to be Reliance, the custodial transportation company who are *supposed* to take prisoners from police stations & courts to jail. Currently how many prisoners have they accidentally allowed to go free ??? Reminds me of Monty Python's Life of Brian;
"Crucifixion?"
"Yes...."
"Oh good, well out of the door, line on the left, one cross each.... Crucifixion?"
"Uh, no freedom actually - they said I hadn't done anything & that I could go & live on an island somewhere..."
"Jolly good, well off you go then...."
Who did you vote for in the elections Flagg ???
>>By Tchock (Friday, 11 May 2007 01:50)
I didn't vote. The elections came and went and I didn't notice. I used to always get a letter reminding me, but now that I'm actually old enough to vote that's stopped happening, bizarrely. Maybe I will next time. Who did you vote for?
>>By Flagg (Friday, 11 May 2007 14:17)
I couldn't vote. I had a postal vote... which arrived within one day of the election. I had to get it sent on that day if there was any chance that my vote would be counted... unfortunately I was rather more concerned about my upcoming exams. I have no idea who I would have voted for anyway. There was no selection. Even if I was thick enough not realise all the parties are full of shit anway, not one of the leaflets I received actually laid out their manifesto plans. The Scottish Labour party kept on picking on the Lib-Dems - saying how MSP Mike Pringle shouldn't be re-elected because - and I think I understood the underlying tone - "he's a tosser".
So the Labour Party were out - like I was going to vote for them anyway... SLP are as incompetant as you can get.... the Lib-Dems were out because well... they don't actually have any idea about politics & would have a breakdown within 24hrs of being the leading party.... the socialist parties were always going to be out because they're a waste of space with no intelligent planning behind they're grand gestures to society, & also they're feuding like they're both on their menstral cycles - Tommy Sheridan, three people in a bed, apparently a coup d'etat against him - although I would quite rate his importance in those terms - something about the News of the World, mistrust & now all the solidarity within the SSP has dissolved to form hatred between those who were once best-est-buddies... basically they're like kids in a playground arguing over who punched who first. Greens... well I reckon they're sincere about they're manifesto.... but well.... economic policy ??? "Errr... well we hadn't really thought about that since we got into power... lets go live on farms !!" Yeah, "Wind Farms & Legalisation of Cannibis" at least you know where you are with the Greens. So that leaves the SNP. Now although there should be a law against Nicola Sturgeon, exiling her from parliament... (she has no actual opinion but merely argues over anything that someone else is saying...) SNP actually seem like the party most likely to do anything. They're left & it doesn't really matter about independence for Scotland because it would never go through anyway - the referendem would never pass & it would all collapse anyway... too much hassle for just some patriotic dream. I'm scottish, it says british on my passport - but who the fuck cares what's on an official document. You know where you are from inside - that's enough for me. Besides, we've got our own parliament & football team... what MORE do we really want??? ;)
But SNP won........ but one seat. Which means Labour will be in power anway with a coalition........... so overally bugger-all has changed !!!
>>By Tchock (Saturday, 12 May 2007 13:09)
Those last four words say it all really don't they? ;)
Yes, you know where you are from inside. I envy you being from Scotland... you don't have to feel ashamed.
>>By Flagg (Saturday, 12 May 2007 17:54)
The raw materials are being purchased by slavery of the habitants and the only party that benefits from it is the West. Not just the US, the West in general. >>>>
Seriously? Someone is existirng in a fantasy world here. Commerce (among other thingd) makes the world go round..... Slavery? Please tell me you aren't serious. Would a manufacturing firm in Amsterdam burchase 'anything' in America that it could buy 'cheaper' and was readily available locally?
American dollars reign supreme.....land of the most vibrantr economy ANYWHERE.
>>By lv2read (Monday, 14 May 2007 09:18)
Are you denying that (de facto) slavery exists today? You're the one living in a fantasy world if you are.
>>By Flagg (Monday, 14 May 2007 11:28)
@ Someone is existirng in a fantasy world here - yep and it's not me
"When a ship carrying hundreds of people was recently turned away from Benin, Africa, officials suspected that the children on board were human slaves. The incident once again brought attention to the problem of slavery. At this moment, millions of men, women, and children—roughly twice the population of Rhode Island—are being held against their will as modern-day slaves" [1]
For many people, the image that comes to mind when they hear the word slavery is the slavery of the Transatlantic Slave Trade. We think of the buying and selling of people, their shipment from one continent to another and the abolition of the trade in the early 1800s. Even if we know nothing about the slave trade, it is something we think of as part of our history rather than our present. But the reality is slavery continues TODAY.
Millions of men, women and children around the world are forced to lead lives as slaves. Although this exploitation is often not called slavery, the conditions are the same. People are sold like objects, forced to work for little or no pay and are at the mercy of their 'employers'. [2]
BERKELEY – Washington, D.C. - A new report on forced labor in the United States reveals in disturbing detail how individuals in communities across the country are forced through threats or violence to work in deplorable conditions for little or no pay. The report, "Hidden Slaves: Forced Labor in the United States," describes for the first time the nature and scope of modern-day slavery in America. [3]
Modern Slavery: People for Sale
During 2001, at least 700,000 and potentially as many as 4 million men, women and children worldwide were bought, sold, transported and held against their will in slave-like conditions, according to the U.S. State Department. [4]
and so on and so on and so on......But of course I can come up with a thousand reports more, I'm sure some people will keep their heads in the clouds and live in a perfect world where all's fair except for those who don't deserve it.
Sources:
[1] http://www.infoplease.com/spot/slavery1.html
[2] http://www.antislavery.org/homepage/ [lose space] antislavery/modern.htm
[3] http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/ [lose space] 2004/09/23_16691.shtml
[4] http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/ [lose space] weekly/aa061202a.htm
>>By Lynn (Monday, 14 May 2007 16:34)
And that said, either this is gonna be a serious discussion based on reality or I don't even bother to waste time on posting links.
>>By Lynn (Monday, 14 May 2007 16:36)
The topic ain't slavery.....period. If a group of businessman in Amsterdam offer to sell me chips equal to the Pentium, but at a reduced cost......purchasing from them will benefit me and greatly benefit the hordes of previously unemployed people that now will be earning a livlihood....show mw links that document that!!!!
Plain and simple you are obfuscating. Why?? The difference between the Third World Countries and modern society is primariily commerce. Please, please OPEN your eyes.
Countries everywhere vie to do business with America. EVERYONE wants to sell their goods here.
Where have you been? There is not a country in Latin America, Asia, alaysia that doesn't want to trade with the USA. Why do you think that is??
Slavery in America?? I believe that many would like to receive the slave wages that many get in America. Why don't we talk specifics?? Why do you obfuscate? Why don't you specifically address piece work, or the like? Are you referring to the Malaysian girl of 13 that comes to America with no English skill and can ONLY sew? She can earn $20/day, is given room and board----what would you do with her? Solutions ONLY please. And, by the way....NO EDUCATION. Should we send her packing??
>>By lv2read (Monday, 14 May 2007 20:42)
"Just Because You Feel It, Doesn't Mean It's There....."
But Lynn, I thought it was a perfect world ?!?!?!
<Would a manufacturing firm in Amsterdam burchase 'anything' in America that it could buy 'cheaper' and was readily available locally?>
Little confused by this statement.... are you saying that foreign countries buy from america that they can't get locally ???
Because I don't know if you've noticed lately, but America's got more imports than export's & the world's resources come from the middle east (oil), lumber (your local rainforest), fashion (china - the shoefactory called Taiwan)......
Have you not read or seen news reports on the slave trade WITHIN Africa???
When Lincoln signed the abolishment of slavery, it wasn't America ending the global slave trade - it was America ending it against the rednecks so that the black commuity would go north & thus be used a cheap labour.......
(apologies for lack of proper sentence structure & probably wording of argument... middle of my exams...so am a bit rushed.... )
>>By Tchock (Monday, 14 May 2007 20:56)
@please OPEN your eyes
I just did, this is just a frustrating place to be - so goodbye!
>>By Lynn (Monday, 14 May 2007 22:56)
Slain any dragons lately L2R? Rescued any princesses? Do you think it's worth taking four levels of Fighter just to get Weapon Specialization?
The topic ain't slavery, well that's lucky for you isn't it? Because if it was then you might have to concede that we have a point there.
So Lynn is obfuscating... a list of quotes followed by links to the sources they were taken from is obfuscating???
>If a group of businessman in Amsterdam offer to sell me chips equal to the Pentium, but at a reduced cost......purchasing from them will benefit me and greatly benefit the hordes of previously unemployed people that now will be earning a livlihood....show mw links that document that!!!!
Yes, I'm sure there are examples where that is the case, where the people employed by those businessmen really are earning a decent living, in which case they win, you win, everybody wins and that's great, there's nothing for us to argue about... but I think Tchock, Lynn and I were talking about the REST of the time.
>>By Flagg (Tuesday, 15 May 2007 00:05)
Bye Lynn. I hope you come back eventually.
>>By Flagg (Tuesday, 15 May 2007 00:06)
Made a mistake....would an American company purchase anything from a foreign country that it could obtain cheaper at home? Nor would a Dutch company purchase equivalent products from the USA that it could get locally at the same price or lower? I can't believe that we hare arguing over this!! We all know this answer.
>>By lv2read (Tuesday, 15 May 2007 00:10)
We're NOT arguing over that, we're arguing over whether or not slavery exists in the modern world, and you seem to have slavery confused with being properly employed.
Would any decent businessman buy produce from one place rather than somewhere else because it's cheaper? Of course. Would any decent businessman buy produce that's incredibly cheap because it was produced by child laborers working for ten cents a day or whatever? You tell me. The key word is DECENT, by the way.
>>By Flagg (Tuesday, 15 May 2007 00:22)
Flagg, "were talking about the REST of the time"
Not necessarily, there hardly IS a 'rest of the time' - every good we buy is made out of raw materials, so you'd have to go back to the very root to establish certainty that your good was not manufactured with the help of modern slaves!
So ones more, jfy - because I know at least you'll find it interesting :-)
Two hundred years ago , both the United States and Great Britain banned trade in slaves. But that was not the end of slavery: Britons and Americans alike were complicit in an economy built on slaves up until the Civil War. Today, even as many of us look back on that history in revulsion, modern-day Americans are still complicit in slavery. We buy a wide range of goods, from chocolate to cars, that include ingredients or components from the hands of forced or even slave labor. We also invest in companies that—often unintentionally—perpetuate slavery.
Bloomberg News reported in November 2006, for example, that many companies, including Toyota, GM and Frigidaire use materials that start with slave labor in Brazil. [1]
Chattel Slavery
"Slavery is not a horror safely consigned to the past; it continues to exist throughout the world, even in developed countries like France and the United States. Across the world slaves work and sweat and build and suffer. Slaves in Pakistan may have made the shoes you are wearing and the carpet you stand on. Slaves in the Caribbean may have put sugar in your kitchen and toys in the hands of your children. In India they may have sewn the shirt on your back and polished the ring on your finger. They are paid nothing.
"Slaves touch your life indirectly as well. They made the bricks for the factory that made the TV you watch. In Brazil slaves made the charcoal that tempered the steel that made the springs in your car and the blade on your lawn mower. Slaves grew the rice that fed the woman that wove the lovely cloth you've put up as curtains. Your investment portfolio and your mutual fund pension own stock in companies using slave labor in the developing world. Slaves keep your costs low and returns on your investments high.
"Slavery is a booming business and the number of slaves is increasing. People get rich by using slaves. And when they've finished with their slaves, they just throw these people away. This is the new slavery, which focuses on big profits and cheap lives. It is not about owning people in the traditional sense of the old slavery, but about controlling them completely. People become completely disposable tools for making money." [2]
[1] http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2007/02/09/ [lose space] we_can_fight_modern_slavery.php
[2] http://www.new-enlightenment.com/new_slavery.htm
I'm sorry to have been so off-topic ;-)
>>By Lynn (Tuesday, 15 May 2007 00:32)
It's a very emotional, subjective sort of argument, that second one, but there's surely some truth in it too. I really want to find out if you deny any of this L2R. So far I don't know because you just keep changing the subject.
>>By Flagg (Tuesday, 15 May 2007 00:59)
The slave labor that is spoken of is defined and regulated by the country of origin. Frequently socialist publication describe AND exploitation of labor as S L A V E R Y,,,which it is not. I'll give you a funny example. A famous (American) basketball star---Majic Johnson---said that he wanted to make akk the employees (of his Starbucks franchises) millionaires....the only caveat is that he wants them to make him a billiionaire!! Exploitation of labor is a noble capitalist pursuit....as noble as can be. It is the businessman that creates jobs...not the government. Look at the American wealth....look at the most envied...the most copied system on EARTH. Please open your eyes. It is not coincidince that we are weralthy, thatmany, many 19-23 year olds own SUVs, that the middle class is incredibly strong. that 15-17 year olds have optimism about their futures....you can accomplish anything here if you choose. I vote to allow the socialist and communist leaders of the Third World their own discretion in monitoring and ruling the lives of their enslaved peoples.
>>By lv2read (Tuesday, 15 May 2007 09:44)
Flagg, did you read anything about 'bricks' for walls in my post? There's a huge wall right in here.
L2R, perhaps this link is of interest to you. It's where you live:
http://pippidory.altervista.org/_altervista_ht/ [lose this space] neverland.jpg
>>By Lynn (Tuesday, 15 May 2007 09:51)
Yep, a big ole brick wall, and we're trying to talk to it.
Lol, yeah that looks about right.
And *did* Majic Johnson make his employees millionaires? For everyone who says (and means) something like that, how many businessmen do you think there are who treat their employees as a resource to be exhausted and then thrown away? Ten? A hundred? And whether or not modern slavery is condoned by the government of the country where it's happening, the fact is it happens. Not just in socialist and communist countries in the third world, but in your country and mine too. Teenagers are brought here from Asia and Africa and made to work as private servants in people's houses on a wage of exactly jack shit per annum. That's in places like London and Manchester. In the third world it's sweatshops producing footballs, trainers, clothes, god knows what else. It really doesn't matter whether the governments over there do anything about it, because every time one of us buys one of those products (which is probably much more often than we think) we're funding it.
>>By Flagg (Tuesday, 15 May 2007 10:26)
If you're looking for a good book on the subject try "Slave" by Mende Nazer/Damien Lewis. Mende was abducted and solded from her home in Sudan and ended up being a domestic slave in.....London!
http://www.damienlewis.com/damien-lewis-slave.php
>>By Lynn (Tuesday, 15 May 2007 16:24)
What's solded? hehe, spellcheck. I mean 'sold' - of course
>>By Lynn (Tuesday, 15 May 2007 16:27)
Once again, you're sounding like a government-issued brochure for America.
Yes, things are all rosy in California. I'm sure that's great. But the middle class probably isn't as strong as you think. I checked the average household income in America. It's maybe around $50k. But that's just an income - you've got OUTgoings on top of that - most of which probably will be going toward the tuition fee for your child's school or university.
<Exploitation of labor is a noble capitalist pursuit....as noble as can be>
I'll tell those working in the sweatshops of Asia not to get depressed........ because it's the nobility of Nike or Gap that is keeping you in a job. Your "funny" example..... yes....
"Net profits for Nike for the quarter rose 28% to $208m (£136m) from $162m a year earlier. The rise followed a 31% rise in profits during the previous quarter."
"The company also reported an 8% rise in sales to $2.68bn from $2.48bn a year earlier."
BBC News Online
So, are all the employees of Nike as rich as those in California ???? Think not.
Of course it is fair for the owner of the company - those high up in the hierarchy & proffessionalism - should have higher wages from those making the shoes. This isn't exploitation of the poor. But when you've got a multi-national company making billions of dollars profit each year on the basis that they're workers are poorly paid, working in horrific conditions for long hours, child labour involved..... THEN I think that comes under "exploitation".
The West are ignorant addicted consumers. We buy cheap crap who's origins we don't know. We don't know what pain was suffered in getting all the food in our shops from the farm to the shelf. Most of the time we don't care. it's the last thing on our mind when it's buy one get one free in Tescos. The thing about us humans is that we think we're quite intelligent. That's why materialism hit it big - the majority of us are thick.
And, no, once again lv2read, no you can't achieve whatever you want in America. It's not all about pure determination. No, there is a little more to life than your cushioned blurry view of reality. There's no point in discussing with someone who has no inclination of wanting to learn what you have to say. Deny it all you like, lv2read - but fortunately there are some souls out there who actually don't believe 2 + 2 = 5.
>>By Tchock (Tuesday, 15 May 2007 17:39)
There's no point in discussing with someone who has no inclination of wanting to learn what you have to say.>>>
Methinks you and Flagg should look inward.....as for Lynn her societh is about as far away from a capitalist society as can be. In 'anything goes' Amsterdam, does it surprise you that Gay marriages are abided there? Does it surprise you that their scientists talk about fixes for 'global warming' that would tax and brutally affect incredeible economies and hi tech societies like the US? Does it surprise you that such a society gives lip service to the war on terror?? That Tchock an d Flagg have have a negative opinion on a vibrant economy while coming from a stagnant one?? Consider:
Millions of teenagers can afford SUVs in American.
A very high percentage of working people can afford weekend trips once a month or more.
Money spent on luxuries here is beyond your understanding.
Come to America...work hard...stick with it......never give up....and if you like to accumulate things...want luxuries....want control over your life.....no excuses....if you want these things....this is where you want to be. If you want to cultivate a garden....want to watch boring BBC programming, purchas cars that are about as unstylish as any known to man...then you should remain in denial, and continue to do without...and continue to live in self denial....America will NEVER look good to you.
>>By lv2read (Wednesday, 16 May 2007 02:44)
The discussion board is currently closed.
|
DISCOVER NEW BOOKS