 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
08-27-2001, 09:29 PM
|
#21 | |
|
Thoth - Egyptian God of Wisdom
 Join Date: March 12, 2001
Location: Birmingham, West Mid\'s, England
Age: 87
Posts: 2,859
|
Quote:
 ------------------  
|
|
|
|
08-27-2001, 09:45 PM
|
#22 | |
|
Fzoul Chembryl
 Join Date: March 1, 2001
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 1,735
|
Quote:
Why the $1,000 billion figure? Is this too high for you? All this tells me is that global trading of services is strong and healthy! This is not $1,000 billion out of the pocket of developing nations and into the pocket of ‘Northern Industrial nations’. The majority of this trade is between ‘Northern Industrial nations’. So what is your point, that we are screwing each other? Is your solution to shut down our borders to anything that we can produce in our own country? I’m sorry but you are already complaining about the waste of natural resources, this will increase this problem 100 fold!! Let’s say that country X can produce a pop can using 1lb. of aluminum, but it takes country Y 2lbs. of aluminum to produce a pop can. Both countries can produce pop cans, but is it not beneficial for country X to produce the pop cans b/c they can do it using less resources? This is where trade is beneficial!! I will post ad nausea on this later ------------------  Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig I've got to admit it's getting better, it's getting better all the time |
|
|
|
|
08-27-2001, 11:51 PM
|
#23 | |
|
Fzoul Chembryl
Join Date: March 1, 2001
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 1,735
|
Quote:
The other thing I think you are hinting at (correct me if I am wrong) is protectionalism. You think that it is ok for these countries be able to export their goods, but should not have to open their markets for import of foreign goods. Plain and simple, this does not work! The problem with this is that a country that is not allowed to export into a country, will not allow that country to export to them. It is not a one way door. Just look at the definition of trade: An exchange of one thing for another. A country will not survive by closing it’s borders to trade and relying only on internal production for support. It will also not survive by only partially opening it’s borders, letting things be exported but restricting imports. We will only have equality in this world when everyone has an ‘equal’ chance at everything the world has to offer BTW what is the make of your bike? Did the rubber come from the UK, how about the metal? ! ------------------ Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig I've got to admit it's getting better, it's getting better all the time [This message has been edited by Moridin (edited 08-27-2001).] [This message has been edited by Moridin (edited 08-27-2001).] |
|
|
|
|
08-28-2001, 04:05 AM
|
#24 |
|
Very Mad Bird
 Join Date: January 7, 2001
Location: Breukelen (over the river from New Amsterdam)
Age: 52
Posts: 9,246
|
Wow. Very interesting. Haven't read the whole thing and I haven't formulated an opinion as yet.
I hung around the last-anti globalisation protest in Sydney, as much to lap up the "12 monkeys" atmosphere, as because I lean towards removing power from the multinationals and ensuring democracies - the people - at least keep the limited voice they have. Scarey stuff all of this. Moridin it seems you have a well formulated counter argument and I shall read it with interest. Silver Cheetah, have we met on any other boards? Anyhow Kudos to you both. A very important topic to be discussed. ------------------ I am the walrus!.... er, no hang on....  A fair dinkum laughing Hyena! |
|
|
|
08-28-2001, 04:22 AM
|
#25 | |
|
Very Mad Bird
Join Date: January 7, 2001
Location: Breukelen (over the river from New Amsterdam)
Age: 52
Posts: 9,246
|
Quote:
While there is a big negative sentiment growing against the "generica" of U.S. suburbs, the solution is not necessarily to replicate another nations individuality. Italy has as many problems as it does options. A lot of stuff is harder to get. Post offices do not sell packaging. You have to go to a seperate store for that. Italy "works" because it is Italy. Smallish, mediteranean, food loving, homogenous, laid back nation that it is. America is not Italy. Similarly what works for Switzerland governmentally is not going to work in China. The Cantons, the public veto etc, work in the microcosm that is the Swiss Confederacy. It's like comparing the functioning of an aircraft carrier with a jetski. I agree that Italy is a vibe though. Wonderful. I love it. The food is some of the best in the world. And as for the coffee.... mmmmmmmmmmm.... ------------------ I am the walrus!.... er, no hang on.... A fair dinkum laughing Hyena! |
|
|
|
|
08-28-2001, 05:13 AM
|
#26 |
|
Fzoul Chembryl
Join Date: July 26, 2001
Location: Brighton, East Sussex, UK
Posts: 1,781
|
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Yorick:
[B] I spent three days in Italy unable to buy a map. A simple road map of Italy. Ha una pianta de la cita? I would ask again and again. No. While there is a big negative sentiment growing against the "generica" of U.S. suburbs, the solution is not necessarily to replicate another nations individuality. Italy has as many problems as it does options. A lot of stuff is harder to get. Post offices do not sell packaging. You have to go to a seperate store for that. Italy "works" because it is Italy. Smallish, mediteranean, food loving, homogenous, laid back nation that it is. America is not Italy. Similarly what works for Switzerland governmentally is not going to work in China. The Cantons, the public veto etc, work in the microcosm that is the Swiss Confederacy. It's like comparing the functioning of an aircraft carrier with a jetski. I agree that Italy is a vibe though. Wonderful. I love it. The food is some of the best in the world. And as for the coffee.... mmmmmmmmmmm.... No, America is not Italy. I've spent time in both, and can agree with you wholeheartedly on that one. They are very different. Both wonderful in their own ways, both have their own problems, like everywhere, I guess. And no, what works for China won't work for Switzerland, and so on and so forth. That's part of why I'm against full out globalisation, every place is different, every culture has it's own needs, ways of doing things, it's own climate and so forth. I am for people providing their OWN services. Local people are more likely to know what local people need - whereas a corporate that comes in from god knows where, may not. Where extra money is necessary, perhaps the wealthy nations that gained so much from colonisation back then could help them to provide these things for themselves, a bit of giving back, maybe? Sorry to hear about your road map problem - as I don't drive, I wouldn't know on that. The Italians do love their cars though, so I'm surprised, to say the least! In Naples, it's more of a stigma to have no car than have no home. You'd think they'd want to know where they're going, but maybe they're so laid back they don't care. I once got caught in a Mafia shootout in Italy (yes, really.) I dropped flat on the floor and lay there quivering for ever such a long time. My companion wet himself.... I'm sure I would have done too if I'd thought about it... Not being able to buy packaging from the post office. Hmmm. So what? Means you get to go to another new and different type of shop! I like that going round to different shops for different things, thing. It does take up time, but the pace of life is slower there, I found. I used to work in the afternoons only, so browsing round the shops in the morning wasn't a problem for me. Still isn't, for that matter. I've crafted my life so I can live it in a way that gives me time for the little things. Re your question Yorick, no, you haven't bumped into me on any other forums, cos I've only just started posting. I'm very much a newbie. I'm very impressed with the forum though, visually and in every other way it is stunning! |
|
|
|
08-28-2001, 05:19 AM
|
#27 |
|
Fzoul Chembryl
Join Date: July 26, 2001
Location: Brighton, East Sussex, UK
Posts: 1,781
|
Doesn't matter if you know the subject well or not, does it? Why not put your vague fears where we can all see them, and respond to them? Go on, do, do....
pretty please.......... |
|
|
|
08-28-2001, 09:36 AM
|
#28 | |
|
Fzoul Chembryl
Join Date: March 1, 2001
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 1,735
|
Quote:
------------------ Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig I've got to admit it's getting better, it's getting better all the time |
|
|
|
|
08-28-2001, 10:31 AM
|
#29 |
|
Fzoul Chembryl
Join Date: July 26, 2001
Location: Brighton, East Sussex, UK
Posts: 1,781
|
Moridin, before I reply to your post – where exactly did I generalise about YOUR thoughts and actions? I don’t believe I put anything in my post about you personally? When I mentioned that I don’t drive, don’t shop at supermarkets etc, I was talking about ME and where I am coming from, not making a comment about YOU. I have not attacked you in any way, shape or form.
Having said that, thanks for updating me on where you’re coming from. No, I did not pick through your many previous posts to discover your thoughts, feelings and stands on various issues. Firstly, I did not even think about doing so, (I have a life, and need time in which to live it!), secondly, if I had thought about it, I would assume that you would acquaint me with the relevant information during the course of our discussion, which you have done. Having got that out of the way, my response.... You say that large companies are ‘are not pushing for GATS b/c they want to drive up profits, they are pushing for GATS so they can be competitive in foreign markets’. Is that so....... Seems to me like a distinction without a difference. Why compete in foreign markets if there’s no profit motive? Just for the hell of it? Because they can’t do without the odd spot of foreign travel? Compete, according to the dictionary, means to strive after or contend for something – that something, in private enterprise, is profit. (At least, that was my understanding during the years I spent working for a large investment bank.) My viewpoint on GATS is that it is fatally flawed, especially with respect to developing countries, in which I have a particular interest. I would like to back up my ‘sweeping generalisation’ above by means of a document called The GATS Debate. It is ‘a response to common arguments used against the critics of the GATS, produced by the World Development Movement. Here’s the link www.wdm.org.uk/cambriefs select the document entitled The GATS debate. Another useful document on the site (go to www.wdm.org.uk/cambriefs/ ) is entitled ‘If it’s broke, fix it’. The case for trade reform at the WTO Ministerial’. ADDED LATER: SORRY have spent ages editing this trying to get the above links to work properly, if you click on it, you'll have to click on the Wto directory, and then onto either gatsdeb.pdf or brokefix.pdf, depending on which you want. Sigh!!! I’d like to suggest that anyone who is interested in this topic could do worse than read these two documents. The WDM are not violent ranters, neither are they anti-trade. Their interest lies in ensuring that the level playing field which Moridin speaks of comes to exist in fact. The GATS Debate is full of references and links to other, relevant, documents and sites, both for and against GATS. Other reading: The World Trade System: how it works and what’s wrong with it. Also, The World Trade System: winners and losers. Both are available at www.foe.co.uk/campaigns/sustainable-development/publications/trade/ Rather than leaving all the work to the document (lazy! if efficient...this is such a complex issue that we could argue about GATS until the end of time) I’d like to respond to your last point here, at the same time giving you some of the background which informs my views. Your point was as follows: ‘A country will not survive by closing it’s borders to trade and relying only on internal production for support. It will also not survive by only partially opening it’s borders, letting things be exported but restricting imports. We will only have equality in this world when everyone has an ‘equal’ chance at everything the world has to offer’. My point is that the ‘equal chance’ and ‘level playing field’ you speak of is a convenient fiction, dear to those who want to increase profits by selling into what they hope and trust will be lucrative developing markets. The huge great big massive enormous advantages belong to the big transnationals, every time, who are competitive in ways that these smaller concerns could never be. They have huge resources on which to draw, not to mention a huge amount of power and influence on governments. (Look at how the tobacco giants manage to keep going, in spite of the fact that they sell poison. Power and influence and a foot in the White House door can get you a long way, baby.....) (Is there a tearing out hair in frustration smiley?) You are assuming that free trade is always going to be beneficial to developing countries – there is a lot of evidence to suggest that this is far from being the case. The following information comes from a UN Food and Agriculture Organisation study published in Sept 1999. (The below relates primarily to goods, rather than services, as I have far more data on that. However, the principle is the same.) A study looking at the experience of 16 countries following implementation of the 1994 Uruguay round Agreement on Agriculture was published in 1999. The countries were Bangladesh, Botswana, Brazil, Egypt, Fijii, Guyana, India, Jamaica, Kenya, Morocco, Pakistan, Peru, Senegal, Sri Lanka, Tanzania and Thailand. The study found that the Agriculture agreement lead to a surge of imports into the developing countries, - however, their exports did NOT increase. The extra imports meant that many farmers have been forced out of business, and have moved to cities to make a living. The study found ‘a remarkably similair experience with import surges in particular products in the post-Uruguay period.... 12 of the 16 countries studied had reduced domestic support for their farmers. While their imports of food increased ‘these countries were not able to raise their exports’. Significant supply-side constraints prevented the countries studied from taking advantage of increased global market access. An FAO official described the findings as ‘contrary to what we had expected. Developing countries had a lot of expectations (in terms of increasing their exports) from the Uruguay Round agreement. Many of their farmers are now finding it very difficult to cope with the surge in imports of basic foodstuffs. Re Egypt, the study says ‘the experience with trade has not been favourable. Imports have risen much faster than exports. Kenya – ‘has increased negative impacts from market liberalisation... Jamaica ‘imports have increased significantly’... Guyana ‘imports of food and live animals almost doubled between 1994 and 1998. Sri Lanka ‘Food imports have witnessed a significant increase since 1996... the surge in imports was followed by a decline in domestic production in a number of food products, resulting in a clear drop in rural employment. ... a loss of 300,000 jobs occurred following the recent drop in the production of onions and potatoes.... Papers presented at a conference on trade and food security in April 1999 revealed a common problem – trade liberalisation has worsened, rather than improved, the food security of the rural poor in developing countries, showing that it means more imports, and more priority for crops for export (cash crops), often reduces priority given to food crops, and that it concentrates power in the hands of transnationals. There are other, SAPs related, studies. SAPs generally require governments to remove barriers to exports and imports. Rather than increasing food output and leading to a better deal for farmers, SAPs have created an environment that is favourable to larger food producers, such as the transnationals, who are more interested in export crops, rather than food crops which meet local needs. Ghana, after SAPs – ‘.. having produced maize, rice, soya beans, ..... farms cannot obtain economic prices for them, even in village markets. Their produce cannot compete with imported maize, rice, soya beans...... Smallholder incomes have fallen, and malnutrition among the rural poor has risen’. Kenya ‘trade lib. has led to an increase of food imports, and caused food dumping in local markets... ‘Persistent food deficits, decreased incomes, families eating fewer meals each day.....’. I’m sorry if this is a all a bit boring – however, as you don’t like sweeping generalisations, I thought I’d sort you out a few facts. (Facts that translate into real, in your face, grinding poverty.) There are lots of other points I could make, and again, I haven’t replied to all your post! but the GATS debate document makes many of the points that I would have wanted to, in a far better and succinct way. [This message has been edited by Silver Cheetah (edited 08-28-2001).] [This message has been edited by Silver Cheetah (edited 08-28-2001).] [This message has been edited by Silver Cheetah (edited 08-28-2001).] [This message has been edited by Silver Cheetah (edited 08-28-2001).] [This message has been edited by Silver Cheetah (edited 08-28-2001).] [This message has been edited by Silver Cheetah (edited 08-28-2001).] |
|
|
|
08-28-2001, 10:41 AM
|
#30 |
|
Zartan
 Join Date: March 1, 2001
Location: London, England
Age: 53
Posts: 5,164
|
Well, for what it's worth, I agree with Silver Cheetah - pretty much everything she's said.
I'm not going to elaborate a great deal at this point as I would pretty much be repeating what has already been said. ------------------  Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so. Epona of The Laughing Hyenas |
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Um. Suggest you have a look at Silver Cheetah's GATS thread. Interesting. | Fljotsdale | General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) | 20 | 08-29-2001 10:23 AM |
