so let's show DMD we can stay on "issues"

[Controller]

.... as the multinational corporation is hogging all the profit do to globalisation.

 

So Ford and GM are 'hogging all the profit due to globalization"? Last time I checked, both companies were losing their asses. What are they supposed to do, give raises to the auto workers and keep all of the jobs in Detroit while their competitors thrive elsewhere? In very short order, they will be out of business completely. FTA's at least allow them to minimize input costs to keep up with competitors.

 

The guy screwing in headlights should read a newspaper or a magazine once in a while and think about picking up another skill - maybe something that might provide gainful employment in a service economy.

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

So Ford and GM are 'hogging all the profit due to globalization"? Last time I checked, both companies were losing their asses. What are they supposed to do, give raises to the auto workers and keep all of the jobs in Detroit while their competitors thrive elsewhere? In very short order, they will be out of business completely. FTA's at least allow them to minimize input costs to keep up with competitors.

 

The guy screwing in headlights should read a newspaper or a magazine once in a while and think about picking up another skill - maybe something that might provide gainful employment in a service economy.

 

Obviously there has to be give and take between business and unions.

[Azazello1313]

My views are a little :tinhat: on NAFTA. I think that agreement and others like it (see EU) are a thinly disguised plan to abort nationhood. I am completely against losing our identity and relative autonomy as Americans. I like the things that make us different, even though they present challenges to our society.

 

the flipside of that is that through freer trade, nations necessarily become allies on a fundamental level through economic interdependence. the chances of us ever going to war with a nation whose economy is deeply connected with our own are basically nil, unless one or the other wants to commit economic suicide. get the whole world thusly connected, every country trying to improve their lot by trading with everyone else, and suddenly you've got a pretty f'n peaceful place. but to get there, we've got to get past a lot of people in a lot of countries who want to be independent of the rest of the world, and to emphasize and protect their parochial "differences". don't get me wrong, a lot of the things that make us cultrurally "different" are awesome, unique things we should always hold on to. just like a chinaman should always hold on to and be proud of HIS cultural heritage, and a russian of his, and so on. but the sooner we all become citizens of the world, first and foremost, the sooner we can stop worrying about destroying each other. economic interdependence through trade is the real, practical means of making this happen.

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

the flipside of that is that through freer trade, nations necessarily become allies on a fundamental level through economic interdependence. the chances of us ever going to war with a nation whose economy is deeply connected with our own are basically nil, unless one or the other wants to commit economic suicide. get the whole world thusly connected, every country trying to improve their lot by trading with everyone else, and suddenly you've got a pretty f'n peaceful place. but to get there, we've got to get past a lot of people in a lot of countries who want to be independent of the rest of the world, and to emphasize and protect their parochial "differences". don't get me wrong, a lot of the things that make us cultrurally "different" are awesome, unique things we should always hold on to. just like a chinaman should always hold on to and be proud of HIS cultural heritage, and a russian of his, and so on. but the sooner we all become citizens of the world, first and foremost, the sooner we can stop worrying about destroying each other. economic interdependence through trade is the real, practical means of making this happen.

 

good posting

 

:hug:

[westvirginia]

good posting

 

:hug:

 

OMG, I almost miss skins.

 

Naaaahhhh

[Jimmy Neutron]

the flipside of that is that through freer trade, nations necessarily become allies on a fundamental level through economic interdependence. the chances of us ever going to war with a nation whose economy is deeply connected with our own are basically nil, unless one or the other wants to commit economic suicide. get the whole world thusly connected, every country trying to improve their lot by trading with everyone else, and suddenly you've got a pretty f'n peaceful place. but to get there, we've got to get past a lot of people in a lot of countries who want to be independent of the rest of the world, and to emphasize and protect their parochial "differences". don't get me wrong, a lot of the things that make us cultrurally "different" are awesome, unique things we should always hold on to. just like a chinaman should always hold on to and be proud of HIS cultural heritage, and a russian of his, and so on. but the sooner we all become citizens of the world, first and foremost, the sooner we can stop worrying about destroying each other. economic interdependence through trade is the real, practical means of making this happen.

 

True to a point - the real deal-breaker remains what it always has been - natural resources. If these were equally distributed around the globe, I would be more inclined to agree in full with your post.

 

The U.S. is really at a cross-roads in this respect. Our young nation has been very rich from a natural resource perspective since its inception. Unfortunately, our drive for ever-increasing production has surpassed our resources (at least with respect to developed energy). How we address that particular problem will determine our place at the global trade table 100 years from now.

 

P.S. Because of this same issue - don't worry so much about China, but worry the hell about Russia.

[Azazello1313]

As important as aid is, as important as debt relief is, the opportunities that can be generated by trade are far more significant. Trade is the missing link to jobs and opportunity. Unless the people of Africa and other poor countries have access to markets where they can sell their products, they will not escape poverty or be able to give their children a better future.

 

Next week, ministers from 148 countries are heading to Hong Kong for the trade talks under the Doha Round called the Doha Development Round. Over the last few weeks, we have seen expectations for progress in Hong Kong diminish as negotiations remain deadlocked over tough issues, and particularly the issue of support by rich countries for their own agricultural producers. The stakes are too high not just for the poor, but for the global economy, to let the trade talks conclude without real progress. The Doha Round represents an important opportunity to rewrite the rules of an unfair trading system that holds back the potential of the poorest people of the world.

 

Under the current rules, rich countries are able to keep barriers highest on the goods produced by the poorest countries. Consider this example. Little Mongolia, that exports to the United States just about $240 million a year, pays more in tariffs than Norway does on $6-1/2 billion of exports to the United States. Bangladesh, one of the poorest countries in the world, is charged the same amount of tariffs on its $2 billion of exports to the United States that France pays on $30 billion of exports. It's simply not fair. And the answer, by the way, is not to pick on Norway and France; the answer is to open opportunities for those poor countries.

 

Countries sitting at the negotiating table must look beyond their own vested interests. And remember, that if Doha fails, it's the world's poor, those 1.2 billion people who are not represented in Hong Kong, who will suffer the most.

 

Seventy percent of the world's poor live in rural areas. They depend on agriculture to earn a living and to feed their families. Rich countries, the developed countries, spent $280 billion annually on agricultural supports. Think about that number: $280 billion a year. That's $5 billion a week, or $1 billion for every workday that go to help farmers, often quite rich farmers, in rich countries and paid for by taxpayers and consumers. Ultimately, in fact, it's the taxpayers and consumers in rich countries that shoulder the costs of these support programs. Consumers pay roughly of that total $168 billion a year in higher prices, and taxpayers pay $112 billion a year in direct subsidies.

 

If you compare those amounts with the amounts spent on aid, the differences are striking. The U.S. and Europe spend up to $3 billion -- excuse me, $3 in support to their farmers for every dollar they spend on aid. For Japan, the figure is even higher: roughly 500 yen spent on their farmers for every hundred yen that goes to development assistance.

 

But the real damage is not just the waste of resources, it's the damage done to farmers in poor countries who are denied markets to sell their goods.

 

It's their children who go hungry, who are deprived of clean water, medicine, and the most basic necessities of life.

 

name that bleeding heart

[Avernus]

No real name calling yet. I'll check back in later.

 

I am waiting for someone to come out and say

 

EARLY APRIL FOOLS!!!!

[yo mama]

name that bleeding heart

Had to Google it, but I was shocked.

[Controller]

Had to Google it, but I was shocked.

 

Not so shocking if you consider the perspective of the IMF and the World Bank.

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

 

He sacrifices, so others do not have to.

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

SPOILER ALERT

Now one scene that I didn't get was when he got snagged in the trap. Who set the trap? Did the zombies do it? The fact that there was a manigan there made me think that maybe he fell into his own trap as it was done similar to the trap he caught the zombie biatch. Maybe he forgot about his own trap? Surely the zombies aren't this intelligent to contruct a trap like that. I guess the mind could play tricks on you after being by yourself for 3 years.

 

[cre8tiff]

The problem I see with global trade is the irresponsibility of some countries toward the environment, and human rights in order to get the costs down. China is a prime example of this, as is Malaysia and other Pacific rim countries that specialize in low-cost goods. The hunger that feeds our Wal-Mart driven lifestyles comes at the expense of people. I worked in the toy industry to 5 years, and trust me, no matter how many times people toe the rationalization line of "their lives are better because we buy thier goods", the folks with those jobs in those countrues are MUCH worse off than the majority of westerners.

 

I personally find that hard to swallow.

[jaxfactor]

You guys are too f'kin quick. I accidentally posted in this thread. Couldn't delete fast enough. Speaking of the mind playing tricks....

[muck]

If the guy screwing in headlights loses his job, he needs to sell his house and car and move into an apartment for a while, so be it. Personal responsibility.

 

If the guy in a mud hut in BFE buys a goat so he can barter the milk for more thatch for his roof, groovy.

 

Just because the guy in the mud hut has a neighbor who is now screwing in headlights for $5.468/hr and is living well below the average westerner doesn't mean he's not living like a king compared to his neighbors, friends and family. Most consumption/posession related satisfaction comes from comparative situations, rather than absolute situations. Meaning, if you live in Manhattan and you make $3 million / yr ... but you're the poorest guy in your extraordinarly upscale building and all your kids friends have parents that are wealthier than you, you will still feel like a failure. However, if you're in a small town working at the hardware store during the week and paiting houses on the nights and weekends, and that allows you to afford a 4bdrm house with two bathrooms, and all your friends and family members have 3/1's, you're "the man".

 

Most peoples satisfaction with their personal economic situation comes from comparing their situation to their friends and family ... not by comparing it to people half way around the world. HOWEVER ... it's pretty common to try to guilt others into thinking that something is bad because there are regional differences between what is considered middle class (or lower or upper class for that matter).

[TheShiznit]

NAFTA is a great idea....and would work....if it had players who want to play fairly. Mexico will not help us enforce immigration policy and will not politically enforce a fair working wage to keep their people employed there. The impose weaker environmental standards that allow US companies to relocate their....pay less in wages and less in overhead....and get favored nation tariffs so that they actually make more money...and they list their stock on our exchange to get greater capitalization. So, while I am not a protectionist....I am all for leveling the playing field for the American worker. How is an American worker going to compete with a worker from India? China? In China, the government dang near runs all industry....it is hard to compete against a government owned workforce. So, while I also like capitalism....it is tough to support global free market capitalism when the middle class American Laborer seems to be the one taking it on the chin in this country.

[Bill Swerski]

NAFTA is a great idea....and would work....if it had players who want to play fairly. Mexico will not help us enforce immigration policy and will not politically enforce a fair working wage to keep their people employed there. The impose weaker environmental standards that allow US companies to relocate their....pay less in wages and less in overhead....and get favored nation tariffs so that they actually make more money...and they list their stock on our exchange to get greater capitalization. So, while I am not a protectionist....I am all for leveling the playing field for the American worker. How is an American worker going to compete with a worker from India? China? In China, the government dang near runs all industry....it is hard to compete against a government owned workforce. So, while I also like capitalism....it is tough to support global free market capitalism when the middle class American Laborer seems to be the one taking it on the chin in this country.

 

+1

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

Q. If all the economists look at a free trade agreement and come to a consensus (hypothetically of course) that the end result will be to lower the standard of living in the US by say 20% but increase the standard of living in a a third world nation by a certain percentage, should a President focus on supporting the legislation because the the economy as a whole for the world improves, or should he/she work against the legislation because of an obligation to protect American citizens first?

[Jimmy Neutron]

Q. If all the economists look at a free trade agreement and come to a consensus (hypothetically of course) that the end result will be to lower the standard of living in the US by say 20% but increase the standard of living in a a third world nation by a certain percentage, should a President focus on supporting the legislation because the the economy as a whole for the world improves, or should he/she work against the legislation because of an obligation to protect American citizens first?

 

Is that a real question?

[untateve]

the flipside of that is that through freer trade, nations necessarily become allies on a fundamental level through economic interdependence. the chances of us ever going to war with a nation whose economy is deeply connected with our own are basically nil, unless one or the other wants to commit economic suicide. get the whole world thusly connected, every country trying to improve their lot by trading with everyone else, and suddenly you've got a pretty f'n peaceful place. but to get there, we've got to get past a lot of people in a lot of countries who want to be independent of the rest of the world, and to emphasize and protect their parochial "differences". don't get me wrong, a lot of the things that make us cultrurally "different" are awesome, unique things we should always hold on to. just like a chinaman should always hold on to and be proud of HIS cultural heritage, and a russian of his, and so on. but the sooner we all become citizens of the world, first and foremost, the sooner we can stop worrying about destroying each other. economic interdependence through trade is the real, practical means of making this happen.

 

This is my favorite Az post ever.

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

Is that a real question?

 

Sure, why not?

[westvirginia]

Q. If all the economists look at a free trade agreement and come to a consensus (hypothetically of course) that the end result will be to lower the standard of living in the US by say 20% but increase the standard of living in a a third world nation by a certain percentage, should a President focus on supporting the legislation because the the economy as a whole for the world improves, or should he/she work against the legislation because of an obligation to protect American citizens first?

 

That's actually a cogent question, and therein lies part of the problem. Politicians are only worried about the effects of something until the next election, and after that, they'll find another issue to hammer. The problem is, an overall free-trade (read: really FREE trade) agreement wouldn't show real benefits in the US for probably 20-30 years, and most politicians careers aren't that long (excepting a few Strom Thurmonds and Tip Oneil's). But it would eventually get to the point where pols would be falling all over themselves to reduce taxes and burdensome regulations so that businesses would relocate here and make use of the under-utilized work force.

[Chief Dick]

My plan is to drink American beer.

[Randall]

My plan is to drink American beer.

 

 

For now it's still brewed here .

[Bill Swerski]

the flipside of that is that through freer trade, nations necessarily become allies on a fundamental level through economic interdependence. the chances of us ever going to war with a nation whose economy is deeply connected with our own are basically nil, unless one or the other wants to commit economic suicide. get the whole world thusly connected, every country trying to improve their lot by trading with everyone else, and suddenly you've got a pretty f'n peaceful place. but to get there, we've got to get past a lot of people in a lot of countries who want to be independent of the rest of the world, and to emphasize and protect their parochial "differences". don't get me wrong, a lot of the things that make us cultrurally "different" are awesome, unique things we should always hold on to. just like a chinaman should always hold on to and be proud of HIS cultural heritage, and a russian of his, and so on. but the sooner we all become citizens of the world, first and foremost, the sooner we can stop worrying about destroying each other. economic interdependence through trade is the real, practical means of making this happen.

 

Agreed overall with your post, as long as the "citizens of the world" part stops at basic environmental protection, fair working wages/conditions, and peace. Being a "citizen of America" and upholding our sovereignty and Constitution should still be number one.

Edited March 27, 2008 by Bill Swerski