• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

The 5 Fantasies of Europe

Kelzie said:
Actually, the reason that a Bolivian farmer can't compete with an American, is that American agriculture is subsidized. The government pays the grower to grow as much as they can, buy what they can't sell because the market's saturated, and give the rest to third-world countries in the form of aid. How is a Bolivian farmer supposed to compete with nearly free food from the US? They can't, they lose the farm, and all of a sudden the country is dependent on the US for food because they don't have any more farmers.

Actually, the reason a Bolivian farmer can't compete is because the American farmer produces 8 times per acre what he produces, stores and transports his product more efficiently, and gets it to market faster.

And while the American farmer does receive subsidies, the amount of taxes he pays compared to the Bolivian farmer erases any competive advantage.

Since we are on the subject of subsidies.........Europeans love to boast about how the US suibsidizes certain industries...especially the aerospace industry. Do you know what the maximum tax rate is for an European Corporation?
There are subsidies, and then there are subsidies. Some are ipen, some are hidden.
 
Kelzie said:
:rofl Do you seriously think that MNCs help the LDCs they go into? I posted this once to galenrox, but I'll post it again for you, since it's relevant:Originally Posted by Kelzie
Have you heard of Bhopal, India? You seem like a smart guy (you are pro-choice after all ), and yet you still seem to think that corporations play nice. In 1984, more than 27 tons of toxic gas leaked out of Union Carbide's pesticide plants. The numerous safety devices installed to detect such an occurance weren't working because Union Carbide was trying to cut costs on the plant. Over 22,000 people have died as a result. In the words of one of the survivors:

"It felt like somebody had filled our bodies up with red chillies, our eyes had tears coming out, noses were watering, we had froth in our mouths. The coughing was so bad that people were writhing in pain. Some people just got up and ran in whatever they were wearing or even if they were wearing nothing at all. Somebody was running this way and somebody was running that way, some people were just running in their underclothes. People were only concerned as to how they would save their lives so they just ran. Those who fell were not picked up by anybody, they just kept falling, and were trampled on by other people. People climbed and scrambled over each other to save their lives – even cows were running and trying to save their lives and crushing people as they ran." source

Horrific right? And Union Carbide's oh so humanitarian response? They promptly sold most of their stock in the plant to lessen their impact. They are still around today. You think farmers stopped buying from them because of what they did? They did of course, have to make a settlement. Each of the survivors got between $300-500. 50,000 Bhopalis can't work today because their nervous systems were destroyed by the gas.

This is just one example. There are thousands more where corporation have committed crime against humanity. You think everyone working is getting paid? Slave labor is rampant, children are sold into sweatshops to work off a debt that gets bigger every day. Corporations are not the suave, cool, elite places that show on wall street. They are souless, and rutheless, and do anything to help their bottom line.

Oh, I've heard of Bhopal...... and I agree that is was monstruous what Union Carbide did in India. But things like that only happen when governments fail to regulate industry properly. What corporation was involved in Chernobyl?
You don't think there are sweatshops in state-run companies in China and Cuba?

As I said before: Corporations don't police themselves. Corporations are no different than people. What do you think would happen in your home town if all of a sudden there was no police force? No government regulation?
 
nkgupta80 said:
of course it does. When you cite history you neglect to realize that there has been an overall trend in history towards globalism. Yes there has always been subjugation, exploitation, and so on. But to put the blame on local authorities is not looking at the big picture. As we globalize, our world is more interconnected. That is why colonialism was unprecedented. Countries took over other countries not to expand borders, but to merely take away resources. Today, since we are even more globalized, colonialism is not possible (I can go into this point more if you want me to). Corporations do this exactly. The main benefits of multi-national corporations are witnessed in the countries that hold these companies. The actual third-world countries that do the work to obtain the resources get less benefit. I went through the reason for this in the other posts if you read it. But I'll reiterate corporatism combined with bad local governments keep these countries from progressing.

To put the blame on local authorities is not looking at the big picture???????

Let me get this straight: We must overlook corruption, bureaucracy, dictatorship, fundamentalism, monopolies, trade barriers, nepotism, irresponsible monetary practices, excessive military spending, tribal warfare, poor land management, protectionism and military adventurism...to look at the "big picture"?

This IS the bg picture.
 
good you listed the problems. Now add in the fact that we are a continually globalizing world and that our economies are interconnected. Corporations are powerhouses in this interconnected world. So lets take some of those problems:

1) corruption: major corruption in third-world countries are between the governments and the greater multi-national corporations. Such dealings allow corporations to influence these third-world governments. Actually such corruption can be found in every country.

2) monopolies: in our globalized world, corporations are usually able to invest and/or buy out local companies. Thus one company can monopolize in a poorer country. Look at De Beers.

3) irresponsible monetary practices: if a country were isolated and practiced such irresponsible practice, the government would eventually fall apart. However, global corporate investment keeps these irresponsible practices going. Dictators love hording the money, but are backed by foreign investors.

You did get the big picture in your previous post, you just didn't realize that it applies to global corporatism as well.

Corporations don't police themselves. Corporations are no different than people. What do you think would happen in your home town if all of a sudden there was no police force? No government regulation?

government is no different than people. However, in this country we the people give them the money and support that gives them the power. Corporations are just people also. But we buy from them. We give them money. They have a lot of power also. And this power can be easily used in government.

Just to simply prove that, rich politicians aren't rich because of their jobs... its because they are businessmen, or have backing by businessmen.
 
nkgupta80 said:
good you listed the problems. Now add in the fact that we are a continually globalizing world and that our economies are interconnected. Corporations are powerhouses in this interconnected world. So lets take some of those problems:

1) corruption: major corruption in third-world countries are between the governments and the greater multi-national corporations. Such dealings allow corporations to influence these third-world governments. Actually such corruption can be found in every country.

2) monopolies: in our globalized world, corporations are usually able to invest and/or buy out local companies. Thus one company can monopolize in a poorer country. Look at De Beers.

3) irresponsible monetary practices: if a country were isolated and practiced such irresponsible practice, the government would eventually fall apart. However, global corporate investment keeps these irresponsible practices going. Dictators love hording the money, but are backed by foreign investors.

You did get the big picture in your previous post, you just didn't realize that it applies to global corporatism as well.



government is no different than people. However, in this country we the people give them the money and support that gives them the power. Corporations are just people also. But we buy from them. We give them money. They have a lot of power also. And this power can be easily used in government.

Just to simply prove that, rich politicians aren't rich because of their jobs... its because they are businessmen, or have backing by businessmen.

#1. WRONG. It's a fact of life that a lot, if not most business done in Third World countries, especially regarding any aspect of imports/exports, is "lubricated" by small bribes to various Custom Agents, Inspectors, and other Government officials. It doesn't matter that these bribes payed to allow the more or less free flow of goods are payed on perfectly legal goods, goods that normally have all the correct paperwork and documentation necessary attached with them, goods which are borne by honest businesspeople that don't want to cheat any Government on either side of a given transaction out of a single nickle, bribes in almost all cases must usually be offered and/or extracted.

"Nod-and-a-wink" corruption on imports/exports, on getting official permits to do business in a given country, on obtaining the most basic services for a business office in a given country like telephone, sewer, water, etc. services, is so stifling, is so against the grain from a gut-level point of view that many businesses take, that many US and European businesspeople simply decide not to bother with Third World nation smaller markets. These decisions by those who control the capital and the business expertise not to invest in smaller national markets because they feel it's simply not worth the hassle for what potential might be there continues to keep Third World markets in an economic ghetto which shows no sign of gentrification.

Remember that the United States sells the bulk of their products to DEVELOPED NATIONS.

The solution? There is but one, and it's common sense; if the Third World wants New World money, business expertise, and venture capital, then each individual country in the Third World will have to clean up its act. I'm not saying any country has to change its political system, its cultural heritage, or its overall official government structure as it relates to regulating domestic and foreign business enterprises. All I'm saying is that our instinctive human morality tells each one of us that corruption is wrong, no matter what religious or political belief system we hold, and that the political collective of a given country needs to enforce that basic human tenet of shared ethic. Those countries that do rein in at least the worst and most penurious cases of official or unofficially tolerated corruption the quickest will be the ones to reap the benefits of the New Global Economic Expansion the soonest. In you don't believe me, look at what's happened with Singapore, as compared with say, its neighbor Indonesia.

Corruption in the Third World is systematic. Government jobs mean profit for the job holder, from the lowest bureaucrat...to the Ministers. These positions are sold, inherited or appointed as rewards for special favors. When a government changes and the slate is cleaned of corrupt bureaucrats, a whole new army of friends, relatives and supporters of the ruler du jour take up residence and start the parasitic cycle all over.

#2 and #3. See #1......and governments don't fall apart that easily. Look to Argentina. Just borrow more, print more money....refuse to pay the debt.
 
#1. WRONG. It's a fact of life that a lot, if not most business done in Third World countries, especially regarding any aspect of imports/exports, is "lubricated" by small bribes to various Custom Agents, Inspectors, and other Government officials. It doesn't matter that these bribes payed to allow the more or less free flow of goods are payed on perfectly legal goods, goods that normally have all the correct paperwork and documentation necessary attached with them, goods which are borne by honest businesspeople that don't want to cheat any Government on either side of a given transaction out of a single nickle, bribes in almost all cases must usually be offered and/or extracted.

These guys go into the countries to get the resources of labor with the least amount of money put in. They see it as an advantage since the country is ruled under and oppressive or corrupt government. However, people do get fed up, adn when they do there is unrest. This is where corporations stop being honest. Someone is threatening the government that they have dealings with. They say ok, lets give this guy some financial support to strengthen his stronghold. Therefore, the companies can continue taking advantage of teh sub-standard wages they pay to the people, while the government is still happily in power. This is what keeps the cycle going.

"Nod-and-a-wink" corruption on imports/exports, on getting official permits to do business in a given country, on obtaining the most basic services for a business office in a given country like telephone, sewer, water, etc. services, is so stifling, is so against the grain from a gut-level point of view that many businesses take, that many US and European businesspeople simply decide not to bother with Third World nation smaller markets. These decisions by those who control the capital and the business expertise not to invest in smaller national markets because they feel it's simply not worth the hassle for what potential might be there continues to keep Third World markets in an economic ghetto which shows no sign of gentrification.

not necessarily, true there are cases like that. But a lot of third world countries have resources that other countries don't have. Resources that these corporations need. I gotta say the Diamond Cartel is the perfect example of how oppressive government combined with greedy corporatism creates havoc. Africa is resource-rich, it isn't some place corporations neglect and don't like investing into. South America is also the same .

The solution? There is but one, and it's common sense; if the Third World wants New World money, business expertise, and venture capital, then each individual country in the Third World will have to clean up its act. I'm not saying any country has to change its political system, its cultural heritage, or its overall official government structure as it relates to regulating domestic and foreign business enterprises. All I'm saying is that our instinctive human morality tells each one of us that corruption is wrong, no matter what religious or political belief system we hold, and that the political collective of a given country needs to enforce that basic human tenet of shared ethic. Those countries that do rein in at least the worst and most penurious cases of official or unofficially tolerated corruption the quickest will be the ones to reap the benefits of the New Global Economic Expansion the soonest. In you don't believe me, look at what's happened with Singapore, as compared with say, its neighbor Indonesia.

comparing country to country is a very generalized argument. What singapore did was genius, but considering it is merely a city on an island, it is very easy to manage. To compare it to Indonesia is like comparing lichtenstein to Russia.

I'll say yes that countries need to clean up their act, but the problem is that corporations do get in the way. The global markets ironically help keep them from reaping the benefits of the global economy.

Remember that the United States sells the bulk of their products to DEVELOPED NATIONS.

interesting right? but think of where some of the resources for the products are from. Where some of the manufacturing is done. Again the diamond cartel is a perfect example. African countries should be rich off the diamond trade. However, the Belgium based corporation De Beers holds a virtual monopoly over this industry. Who reaps the benefits? Belgium and the corrupt politician in those African countries. Any attempt at a local business in the diamond industry is discouraged by any means.

The general gist of my argument is that what keeps most of these countries from cleaning up their act is the corruption brought on by corporatism.

I never said the corporatism is solely to blame for these people's poverty.
 
nkgupta80 said:
These guys go into the countries to get the resources of labor with the least amount of money put in. They see it as an advantage since the country is ruled under and oppressive or corrupt government. However, people do get fed up, adn when they do there is unrest. This is where corporations stop being honest. Someone is threatening the government that they have dealings with. They say ok, lets give this guy some financial support to strengthen his stronghold. Therefore, the companies can continue taking advantage of teh sub-standard wages they pay to the people, while the government is still happily in power. This is what keeps the cycle going.



not necessarily, true there are cases like that. But a lot of third world countries have resources that other countries don't have. Resources that these corporations need. I gotta say the Diamond Cartel is the perfect example of how oppressive government combined with greedy corporatism creates havoc. Africa is resource-rich, it isn't some place corporations neglect and don't like investing into. South America is also the same .



comparing country to country is a very generalized argument. What singapore did was genius, but considering it is merely a city on an island, it is very easy to manage. To compare it to Indonesia is like comparing lichtenstein to Russia.

I'll say yes that countries need to clean up their act, but the problem is that corporations do get in the way. The global markets ironically help keep them from reaping the benefits of the global economy.



interesting right? but think of where some of the resources for the products are from. Where some of the manufacturing is done. Again the diamond cartel is a perfect example. African countries should be rich off the diamond trade. However, the Belgium based corporation De Beers holds a virtual monopoly over this industry. Who reaps the benefits? Belgium and the corrupt politician in those African countries. Any attempt at a local business in the diamond industry is discouraged by any means.

The general gist of my argument is that what keeps most of these countries from cleaning up their act is the corruption brought on by corporatism.

I never said the corporatism is solely to blame for these people's poverty.

Of course these companies go into countries to pay less. Why else would they move their manufacturing plants or services there? Japanese automakers move their plants to the US because american auto workers make less. What you fail to mention is how many badly needed jobs these companies create....jobs that didn't exist before. I can guarantee you that $1,000. a month in Colombia (some 2.5 million pesos) goes a lot farther than 3 times that much in the US.

We are going round and round in the chicken and egg contest. I am not saying that corporate executives are saints or that corporations behave like charitable institutions. People will do all kinds of things for money. I am saying that if these corporations....national and international...are not regulated by local governments they are going to act in what they perceive to be their best interests, period.

African countries cannot get rich off the diamond trade just like oil producing countries cannot get rich off oil. The Free Trade Agreement has done more for Mexico than all the oil and natural gas it has. It's created millions of jobs in that country. Venezuela, in turn, with much, much more oil...and no international corporations, is worse than ever.

Look at Japan. What natural resources does Japan have? I'll tell you: It's people. That's their greatest and only natural resource.

What keeps these countries from cleaning up their act are very deep-rooted causes. In some, it's religion. In others, it's ages-old rivalries and tribal warfare. In Latin America it's caudillismo. In all of them it's the lack of strong institutions to look after the welfare of their people. Institutions with teeth that can enforce minimum wages, working conditions, child labor laws, etc...

There's a saying in law that goes: "All contracts are never enforceable". When it comes to Third World poverty, the saying should be: "All simple explanations are never true".....or.....to the socialists who would bring utopia to the masses: "Be careful what you wish for. It may come true".
 
I like you....

alot.


"globalization" has its curses, but I think we haven't mentioned that its brang the international market to the small business owner.


As much as I hate to say this though, the curse has to be the tole we take on the enviorment now, I think its time for an international regulation of the enviorment, you know how polluted China is? I'm usually not a person to care about this, but I value these types of things...
 
128shot said:
I like you....

alot.


"globalization" has its curses, but I think we haven't mentioned that its brang the international market to the small business owner.


As much as I hate to say this though, the curse has to be the tole we take on the enviorment now, I think its time for an international regulation of the enviorment, you know how polluted China is? I'm usually not a person to care about this, but I value these types of things...

How strange...I find myself agreeing with you. ;) I also think we need international recognition of worker's rights. Living wages, paid overtime, wtc.
 
I only feel there is regulation for what has to be done, everything else is on my shitlist ;)
 
128shot said:
I only feel there is regulation for what has to be done, everything else is on my shitlist ;)

Do you think a living wage is something that does not have to be done? What about heath insurance? Better question would be: what do you think has to be done?

And I am prepared to forgive you for calling me obsessed.;)
 
haha, I'm sorry, i'm gald you accepted my apology before i could ask for one. It slipped my mind actually.


You're still crazy, and I mean that in a good christian way :lol:


I think Capitalism tends to iron other things out, we just have to give it a slight nudge in the right direction sometimes, such as cleaning up the enviorment...


now a "living wage", thats on my shitlist. Since wage should be determined by other forces.


Speaking of wages...

I become good friends with a dell represenative from India, he says their paid quite well and its more than enough to feed his family ;)
 
128shot said:
haha, I'm sorry, i'm gald you accepted my apology before i could ask for one. It slipped my mind actually.


You're still crazy, and I mean that in a good christian way :lol:


I think Capitalism tends to iron other things out, we just have to give it a slight nudge in the right direction sometimes, such as cleaning up the enviorment...


now a "living wage", thats on my shitlist. Since wage should be determined by other forces.


Speaking of wages...

I become good friends with a dell represenative from India, he says their paid quite well and its more than enough to feed his family ;)

Apology accepted.:lol:

Well, see that's fine for your friend from India. I'm very happy that he can feed his family. However, much of the world has to watch their family slowly dieing from malnutrition because corporations don't have to pay them more. Is this right? Should a person's life be dependent on supply and demand? I'm not talking about making sure everyone can own a car or something crazy. I'm talking about paying people enough to LIVE.
 
Well, we can go back to the whole dictatorship thing again if you wish..


I'll cut to the chase, a corporation can not do these horrid acts as long as a government doesn't allow it, the problem isn't the corporation only, its the fact a government is willing to take the bribes.

Fix the gov, Fix the problem. I can only suggest who a government should sleep with. His people or his cash flow.
 
128shot said:
Well, we can go back to the whole dictatorship thing again if you wish..


I'll cut to the chase, a corporation can not do these horrid acts as long as a government doesn't allow it, the problem isn't the corporation only, its the fact a government is willing to take the bribes.

Fix the gov, Fix the problem. I can only suggest who a government should sleep with. His people or his cash flow.

Ah but who is going to apply your international regulations on the environment? The very same government.
 
this is true, I'd offer incentives to do it as well personally, as its a give and take relationship.


I just don't agree we should start going regulation happy. I just think this has to be done, to ensure capitalism keeps on going.
 
128shot said:
this is true, I'd offer incentives to do it as well personally, as its a give and take relationship.


I just don't agree we should start going regulation happy. I just think this has to be done, to ensure capitalism keeps on going.

So you think making sure people are able to eat off the wages that they are paid is going "regulation happy"?
 
Why must everyone play the guilt card?

If I say, I don't care, I look like a heartless bastard, if i say we shouldn't do anything about it, I look like a heartless bastard, if I agree we should set a standard of living in foot, then I look like I'm anti capitalist.

DAMN IT WHY MUST I CHOOSE! I would really like to see a compromise to make everyone happy...
 
128shot said:
Why must everyone play the guilt card?

If I say, I don't care, I look like a heartless bastard, if i say we shouldn't do anything about it, I look like a heartless bastard, if I agree we should set a standard of living in foot, then I look like I'm anti capitalist.

DAMN IT WHY MUST I CHOOSE! I would really like to see a compromise to make everyone happy...

Nyah nyah. :2razz: Times a tickin. Which is it? Heartless bastard or anti-capitalist?
 
seeing as I've been crushed to say it, I'm going to take an anti-capitalist solution to this one, I don't want anyone else to live through the death of a loved one as I have.

Can they get a tax break though? Come on man, we all need to benefit.
 
128shot said:
seeing as I've been crushed to say it, I'm going to take an anti-capitalist solution to this one, I don't want anyone else to live through the death of a loved one as I have.

Can they get a tax break though? Come on man, we all need to benefit.

Yay!!!! I win!!! :2party: Hey if you want to sign up for the socialist group, you can do it under the User CP...I'm kidding, I'm kidding. ;)

You see why I have problems with capitalism now? These are people's lives we are dealing with, not supply and demand/free market numbers.
 
Its a conflict of interest for me.


I like minimum regulations, I think we should just get the right ones down and then all bets are off..


Just think what wonders that could do. It'd be Hong Kong capitalism all over again. YEAH FOR INNOVATION.
 
128shot said:
I like you....

alot.


"globalization" has its curses, but I think we haven't mentioned that its brang the international market to the small business owner.


As much as I hate to say this though, the curse has to be the tole we take on the enviorment now, I think its time for an international regulation of the enviorment, you know how polluted China is? I'm usually not a person to care about this, but I value these types of things...

I think that before we start asking the Third Word to stop polluting, we have to lead by example......and we're certainly not in a position to be an example.
 
I was not just talking about the third world, my bad.
 
Back
Top Bottom