What do you think of GATS?

[Moridin]

Silver Cheetah -- The reason I have not made more responses is simple, I have not had the time. Like you, I too have a life and it has taken precedent. Most of the replies I made to you yesterday were made after I was home from work. I will respond to your posts when I have the time, if I choose to make a few 'shorter' posts in between so be it, that is none of your concern. I have a feeling this debate is not something that either one of us wishes to 'rush'. I certainly know that is not usually my style, but as a typical american I feel that I must respond quickly, rather than thoughtfully.

I do not wish to turn this into a debate about our debate styles.

As for the sweeping generalizations, can you point out where I said that? As for the links and quotes, if you read an earlier post of mine, I say that I think they are good for other people to read, and that I was not attacking you for putting them in there...aaaahhhhhh again it is just an attack on how you present your side, not the topic at hand.

I will attempt to answer a couple of your posts tonight if/when I have more time.



------------------


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

[Fljotsdale]

'Nuther thing you might like to know, Silver Cheetah:
At the top of each posted page is a series of symbols. One of 'em says 'quote'.
click on it and you will get a page with the comments of the person you want to reply to. Delete everything you are not answering, leave the rest, and post your reply below the final QUOTE mark. Makes life easier.
I really AM an angel, aren't I?

Hey Yorick? Will I get to heaven now?

------------------




[This message has been edited by Fljotsdale (edited 08-28-2001).]

[Moridin]

OK I am going to attempt to reply in a coherent manner to the massive amount of data I just read

As you (silver cheetah) stated ‘this is such a complex issue that we could argue about GATS until the end of time’. There are so many areas to be covered and addressed that I would like everyone that reads this to bear in mind, for the sake of my sanity, and to not bore you to death, I think it is better to address small items at a time, and while they may seem inconsequential when taken alone, I hope they will add up to provide an overall look of some of the benefits of GATS.

GATS may not be a ‘fix-all’ solution to the gap between Industrial Nations and Developing Nations, but unfortunately I don’t believe a ‘fix-all’ solution exists. I disagree with some of the points of the GATS, but agree with some. The problem lies in how to go about pleasing everyone? Do we destroy GATS in it’s entirety, b/c of a few flaws, do we take out those flaws and apply the rest, or do we accept the package in whole and try to work out the kinks later?

The problem with economics (and when everything else is stripped away, this is about economics) is that unlike other sciences, economics cannot be researched in a lab. Ideally we would be able to create a pseudo economic environment to ‘test’ our theories, but as of this time the sheer unpredictability of human nature makes this impossible. Pharmaceutical drugs go through rigorous examination, in the research and development stage, to ascertain the positive results and any negative side-effects. Many times the negatives outweigh the positives and the research is scrapped, sometimes the negative side-effects are thought to be ‘small’ during R&D, but when actually applied to humans they turn out to be deadly. And, as is the case with many drugs the negative side-effects are worth it for the positive gains.

Ideally economics could be researched and developed in the same way. Testing potentially positive improvements on animals or in computer simulations while ascertaining the negative side-effects. Obviously this does not work. There is no ‘lesser’ being that has any sort of economic structure, and computer simulation cannot mimic human behavior. It cannot take into account things like the true impact a lost job may have on a family, or how easily a worker can adjust from one job type to another.

Therein lies the dilemma. We are trying to take something quantifiable and apply it to something un-quantifiable.

If a US based agri-business starts to operate in a developing country, displacing local farmers, what is the true cost-benefit analysis that can be done. We can measure the effect of cost savings for the local consumer. We can measure the amount of new tax revenue this business is paying. We can measure sales, costs, profits, losses…but (as stated above) we cannot measure the effect that a loss of job may have on a family who relied on raising and selling crops for their income. We cannot measure the happiness or madness of the local consumer because they are now dealing with a new, foreign supplier.

Unfortunately the world seems to revolve around money. A dollar figure must be attached to everything, that has become the ‘standard’ for an equal measure of worth. It is unarguable that a new Lexus is ‘worth’ more than a gallon of milk (well maybe not if you are thirsty but have no place to go ) but you get my point! It becomes tricky when you have to measure the worth of a human life, or emotional distress.

Sorry Silver Cheetah if I did not directly address the issue of third world countries but I am getting to that



------------------


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

[Silver Cheetah]

Okey dokey. I must say, (I hope you won't be offended by my saying this) some of the ways you put things feel a bit like 'smacking down'. Like saying 'that is none of your concern'. Feels a bit like a Victorian father figure As a result, my posts to you are rather curt, when I would normally favour a rather more friendly style. I'm going to cut and paste my long post in shortly. It's likely to be my last post of any substance for a day or two, as I have a friend from Holland coming to stay, and so will not be able to spend too much time posting.

Re links and posts, what you actually said was 'It just seems like your posts are little more than a list of links and quotes' - I took exception to the plural as used here, as only one post had any links or quotes in, and it seemed an unfair comment. On the 'sweeping generalisation' thing, I've checked and no, you didn't say that, just implied it. My apologies!




[This message has been edited by Silver Cheetah (edited 08-28-2001).]

[Silver Cheetah]

Hiya Moridin

Ok, here’s with my philosophy of life, the universe and everything as it relates to the topic(s) we’ve been discussing. It’s not a considered, tidy post. It’s what I think and feel. It’s also long – I don’t expect you to reply to all the points! or even most of them.

First of all, when you say ‘let’s face the facts of today, not our ideals’, - I think that is sad. Without ideals, we are less than human, I believe. We are also unlikely to have much in the way of vision. Ideals are what inspire us, make us want to work to build a better world. (I imagine the words idea and ideals come from the same root....) And yes, of course one has to take account of the facts. We have to work with what we have, not with what we’d like to have. Facts, and ideas about what to do with the facts. Down to earth visionaries, that’s what we need!! (Any offers out there?? )

I am idealistic, yes. It’s not something I’m ashamed of, on the contrary. However, I’m not an armchair idealist. I like to put my money (not to mention my time and energies) where my mouth is. One of the things I do is Greenpeace activism. As you’re probably aware, Greenpeace is a non violent organisation. When we do an ‘action’ to draw attention to a state of affairs in the world, we do it responsibly and non aggressively. The purpose of Greenpeace, like many other non governmental organisations (NGOs) is to bear witness to some of the less pleasant things that are happening in the world. There’s a lot of white noise out there, and a lot of the stuff that goes on tends to get lost in it.

I mention Greenpeace because I’m totally into the idea of bearing witness. In a way, that’s what this post has been all about. (Hence my links and book titles....)

Getting to GATS.... let’s look at some background.

We are living in a world where the population is currently at 6 billion and climbing. We are using up our fossil fuels at phenomenal rates. We have a changing climate, and do not yet know what all the implications of that are. Our seas, rivers, air and earth become more polluted by the day. We are cutting down the rainforests, again at a phenomenal rate. Top soil is depleting, again, at a phenomenal rate. I can’t remember offhand just how many man made chemicals we’re released into the environment without proper testing, it’s a hell of a lot.

And the answer to that, you would have me believe, is trade, more trade, and yet more trade. Eliminating barriers to trade, and trade in services. More and more and more products made from more and more precious resources, generating more waste we can’t cope with and have nowhere to put. And it’s all somehow ok, because whilst the rich are getting richer, the knock on trickle down effect will mean that the poor of the earth will benefit, in the end. (Not true. As free trade with developing countries increases, the gap between the world's rich and poor is widening, rather than closing. Currently, over one and a quarter billion people are living on under a dollar a day. In Africa, consumption is twenty per cent lower than in 1980. Basic human needs - such as adequate nutrition and literacy - are still not being met.

As global trade expanded between 1975 and 1997, the average wealth per person in the world's thirty one richest countries increased, yet in thirty one mostly poor countries it declined. In 1960, the twenty per cent of the world's population living in the richest countries were thirty times richer than the poorest twenty per cent. By 1997, they were seventy four times richer. The United Nations has acknowledged the link between globalisation and increasing inequality. Basically, this is my argument against GATS. All it will give us is more of the same – big companies generating big profits for those who already have, at the expense, very often, of those who haven’t. I don’t believe it’s going to help the very poor at all. (Sorry. I said I wouldn’t back up my ‘philosophy’ with figures. These are courtesy of Friends of the Earth. I used them in a booklet I wrote a few months ago on Fair Trade, for Fair Trade Fortnight. They are statistics which I feel it’s important that people should know about.)

The mantra of current economics is growth. Growth is good....... growth is god! BUT GROWTH CANNOT CONTINUE INDEFINITELY!! We live on a finite planet. Our resources are finite. Yet we go on multiplying and using up resources as though they were infinite. It’s hardly rocket science, is it? Something has to give. Not only is the world’s population expanding rapidly, but big business wants to make sure that every single member of the population turns into American and European style consumers who are going to consume more and more and more and more – how long do you think our dwindling resources are going to last? I guess liberal economists are expecting some kind of miracle. Well, let’s all hope you believe in a very benevolent deity indeed, because s/he’s sure got some sorting out to do!

The only miracle that’s going to happen (and I firmly believe it will if we all do our bit) is when the 100th monkey syndrome kicks in, and enough people start realising we’re on a path to nowhere for it to make a real difference. That’s started happening – the anti–globalisation protests, are only the tip of the iceberg. Throughout the world, quite ordinary people, ordinary white and blue collar workers, are realising that something has to change soon, or we’re all history. To my mind, what would make the greatest difference is to start gradually doing away with the idea of competition and replacing it with the idea of community. Instead of competing against each other endlessly, we could try working together for the good of all human kind. (Please don’t tell me GATS is designed to that end, because I shall be physically sick.)

Moridin, you say that you are aware of environmental issues. I’m just a little puzzled, however, as to how you manage to separate off your concerns from the issues associated with globalisation. Globalisation is CAUSING a huge swathe of the problems, for goodness sake! We’re ruining the planet we live on (don’t forget, we only have the one) because of short term, head in the sand, profits led thinking. Use up the environment and never mind tomorrow. And the big multinationals are right up there leading the pack of thick headed short termers. (Closely followed by government, who only care about getting re-elected, rather than the long term welfare of their citizens.) It’s all about profits NOW, rather than sustainable development over a long period, which might conceivably mean slightly less profit now. What about quality of life, (clean air would be nice! Drinkable water that isn’t saturated with chlorine! And so on. Let’s make a push to solve these problems! But no. )

Quite the opposite, in fact. Who screwed the Kyoto protocol, so that what was finally implemented was a pile of useless crap! American multinationals, that’s who! (some of the who, at any rate, if not all of the who), those same multinationals that funded Bush’s election campaign. (Exxon being one of them....) American business and American government is not interested in cutting emmissions, because ‘it might damage the American way of life’. That’ll be the freedom to over consume, I take it. Make the connection!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The attitude is sod the planet – as long as we can keep on generating profits today. Let tomorrow take care of itself, it always has before. Short termism. It drives me crazy.

Quite apart from all that, it’s worth remembering that the whole concept of trade was, originally, about improving the quality of life for those engaging in it. So why have citizens become fodder, as consumers and workers, for big companies. (I’ve worked in some absolute horrors! The worst, I have to say, was an American bank. No respect for people whatsoever. Long long hours, hardly any holiday, and everyone engaged in some ridiculous oneupmanship about who could work the most, and display the proper corporate spirit. They came in on Monday mornings chirping ‘Happy Monday’! The scarey thing was, they meant it. I left after three weeks. Not sure who was happiest, them or me. Contrast that to working in a Dutch bank, where employees had the best benefits I’ve ever come across. They were a lot happier too!)

Profits are important, sure, but what about those other little things like quality of life, for instance?? You need both. Pursuing the one to riduculous extremes at the expense of the other – what’s the point? We work to live, not the other way round. If we’re very lucky, we don’t make the distinction, because we enjoy what we do so much that we’d do it 24 hours a day if we could. Unfortunately, that’s not most people’s experience (especially not if they’re working in a sweat shop producing garments for export to the West. Or toiling in a banana field producing bananas for a big TNC. Or working on a production line in Detroit. Or working in a cigarette factory in the UK. Or working 12 hours behind a desk doing a routine keyboard job. Surely we can do better than this!)

It’s my belief that hard core consumerism has an awful lot to do with our ability to stick our heads in the sand. Don’t misunderstand me, I believe everyone has the right to eat well, live in a comfortable home, have access to good health and education services, and so on. But there’s an awful lot that’s produced in this world that we don’t need, and never have. Crap food full of additives and chemicals, for a start. What’s that all about? Seems strange to me that half the world is worrying about its weight, whilst the other half is somewhere between quite peckish, and starving to death. Half of us overconsume, whilst the other half underconsume (yes, that is a bit of a sweeping generalisation, but you get my point, I’m sure.) It’s not really a problem of production, is it? Well, obviously not. There’s mountains of food being dumped all over. Rich countries overproduce like nobody’s business. It’s more a problem of distribution. When there’s enough food in the world to feed everybody in it, it is EVIL that people are starving.

So much for your neo liberal economic theories – they do not work. If you produce lots and lots of food cheaply, and remove barriers to trade, the food doesn’t automatically go where its needed. No! It goes where people have the money to pay for it. And at present, that’s here in the Nothern hemisphere. Where, at the risk of repeating myself, we have huge problems of overweight and obesity. People go to hospital every day dying of diseases of overindulgence, often because they’re using food as an escape from lives they can’t handle. So we sit and eat chocolate and worry about our weight. Contrast with those pictures of skeleletal kids on the tv, so numb with misery that they don’t cry any more, don’t even blink. (PLEASE don’t people who eat chocolate or are overweight take this as a personal comment or attack! It really isn’t.)


Moridin, in response to your question of what to do about increasing quality of life in developing countries...

I don’t know. But I have some suggestions. Drop the debts. Let such countries stop growing cash crops to pay Western debts, and let them grow food crops to feed their people instead. And yes, some luxury crops for export. But logically, export should come AFTER a country has fed its people, not before.

Supply developing countries with what they need to build their own infrastructures, infrastructures that will be appropriate to their cultures and their needs, supplied by local people who know what they’re talking about, rather than foreigners who want to impose their own, (generally inappropriate model) on cultures which are nothing like their own, and which they often fail to sufficiently understand. Do this instead of giving them aid, aid and more aid, which is often spent unwisely.

Again, rather than giving aid, supply clean technology. Help them to move past our own wasteful industrial model without getting sucked in. Learn from our mistakes.

Put all tyrants into therapy, where they can’t do their people any harm, and can’t syphon off aid money to fund new weaponary, wars, hedonistic lifestyles not shared by their people, etc etc. Air lift ‘em out!

Stop pretending to them that the Western lifestyle is the epitome of all good. Yes, it’s great to be well fed, clothed and housed. I dont knock it for a second. But there’s a heck of a lot of problems in the West, a lot of neurotic, unhappy, alienated people who don’t have a clue why they’re alive, and often wish they weren’t. A lot of people who lose themselves in front of the tv every night, trying to forget they’ve got to go to work the next day. A lot of people who’ve no real self worth, or self esteem, because they have grown up in a culture that prizes people for what they have, what they achieved, rather than simply because they are. In a culture where you have to earn, and be deserving of love, even as a tiny. Blimey, no wonder we’re all so obsessed with making money to buy those ridiculous symbols. They define who we are, and reassure us that we’ve earned the right to be alive.

Give me convenience or give me death’ – anyone remember the Dead Kennedys? California Uber alles was one of theirs, Holiday in Cambodia another. They had some rather insightful things to say about modern consumer culture if I remember rightly. A culture where corporations sell things to people on the basis that they are not good enough just as they are. (All toiletry products, diet products, - well, all products really. Its never the products that are sold, is it? They’re quite ordinary really, half of them not even necessary. It’s the lifestyle that is sold, appealing to people’s desire to be someone else, some way else, some where else. What a great way to live, not (one of the reasons I got rid of my tv. All those stupid, stupid adverts). How many anorexic, bulimic women do you know? If none, how many women who constantly worry about their weight, what they look like? It’s a great way to be, isn’t it. And all down to our friends the corporations, who will do almost anything to sell their products, make that extra buck. Even men are catching the insecurity bug these days...... So, yes, life in the West. It certainly does have its advantages. But it’s not all its cracked up to be, although it can be.

Having said that, we have an inestimable amount that is valuable. With what we have, - the democratic process being one of those things, the right to elect our leaders (would be great if they lived up to their election promises instead of renaging the minute they get to sit in the big chair, but hey...) - we have the potential to live amazing lives, and, I believe, launch the process of cleaning up the planet, rather than sitting and complaining because the developing nations aren’t going to take as much of the burden as we are, in the first instance (which is because they aren’t the ones who created the problem.).Yes, it’s another Kyoto reference. Globalism and the environment, they go hand in hand.

A point I think it is important to make is that I don’t condemn globalism out of hand. It’s brought us a lot of benefits, as well as pushing us to what may prove to be the brink of extinction. So why don’t we USE those benefits – global communications, contact with people in countries all over the world (obviously not the very poor, they don’t go in for computers....) to foster a sense of community and work together to take the best of what we have, and extend it to those who need it. (With the internet, this is already happening to a great extent.) Working together, we can change the world. Community, rather than competition. Of course, this can’t happen overnight. It would be a gradual process. But not too gradual. We don’t have time.

Big business can help too. There are some enlightened companies, such as Rank Xerox, who subscribe to something called Natural Capitalism, which is certainly a big step in the right direction. More and more companies are getting interested in natural capitalism. which do business in a way that takes account of the environment, rather than ignoring it. There are ideas for taxing companies that pollute, rather than taxing labour. And so on. There are many ways forward that will depend for their success on business taking a major role. What we need are companies that care about the environment, people’s welfare, and overall quality of life. There are such companies, and I applaud them. (Moridin, I guess you know about natural capitalism? What are your thoughts on that?)

Sorry this post is so long, and rather ranty and rambly. But there are so many things to cover and the issues are so complex! Anyway, it’s what I think!! I haven’t said everything I wanted, but life is so short................

[Moridin]

Silver Cheetah!

Very well said

I think Fjlotsdale must have had her tea leaves out when she said this

Originally posted by Fjlotsdale: You are both making some very good points and it is interesting to see the reasoning from both sides of the fence. I suspect you are going to find yourselves agreeing more than the opening salvo's led me to expect!

We are not as different as we make out to be. The biggest difference, I think, comes in our approach to the same problem! I will address your post at a later time, but I just wanted to say now, that I agree with almost everything you said, but of course disagree with some I think we are leaving from the same station but taking different trains to get to the same destination!

------------------


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

[Moridin]

First of all, when you say ‘let’s face the facts of today, not our ideals’, - I think that is sad. Without ideals, we are less than human, I believe. We are also unlikely to have much in the way of vision. Ideals are what inspire us, make us want to work to build a better world. (I imagine the words idea and ideals come from the same root....) And yes, of course one has to take account of the facts. We have to work with what we have, not with what we’d like to have. Facts, and ideas about what to do with the facts.

I think you illustrated what I meant. I did not mean that we should not have ideals, nor ignore them. I meant by this that too many people do not want to ‘face’ the facts (as sad as they are), but would rather live in a world of imagination. This is a way to escape all their worries, all their real life problems. I cannot even begin to mention the number of people I know that complain about their life but do nothing to change it. We need to face the facts of the current situation as they are, and use those to realise our ideals.

I am idealistic, yes. It’s not something I’m ashamed of, on the contrary. However, I’m not an armchair idealist. I like to put my money (not to mention my time and energies) where my mouth is

I agree. We need more people like you. I too am not an armchair idealist. I put my money where my mouth is. I wish I could do more (don’t we all), but sometimes there is a necessary evil. I do drive to work, I could take mass transit, I could ride my bike (except in the -30 degree weather) but there comes a point when I must admit that this is not the best use of my time and resources. But also as I stated, I would not continue to ‘not’ do anything about it. I moved here with the knowledge that yes I will have to drive in traffic to work, but in a few months I can walk!

We are living in a world where the population is currently at 6 billion and climbing. We are using up our fossil fuels at phenomenal rates. We have a changing climate, and do not yet know what all the implications of that are. Our seas, rivers, air and earth become more polluted by the day. We are cutting down the rainforests, again at a phenomenal rate. Top soil is depleting, again, at a phenomenal rate. I can’t remember offhand just how many man made chemicals we’re released into the environment without proper testing, it’s a hell of a lot.

No argument!

And the answer to that, you would have me believe, is trade, more trade, and yet more trade. Eliminating barriers to trade, and trade in services. More and more and more products made from more and more precious resources

Wait a minute, I never said this is the answer to the above, and I never said we need to increase production. Trade is not all about new and more products. Again this may seem like a small part but you need to look at it in whole. Trade should be about the efficient use of the resources we have. I am reitterating a point I made earlier, but I feel that this is a good time to expand it.

This is an excerpt from the following site The theory of comparative advantage
"The idea here is simple and intuitive. If our country can produce some set of goods at lower cost than a foreign country, and if the foreign country can produce some other set of goods at a lower cost than we can produce them, then clearly it would be best for us to trade our relatively cheaper goods for their relatively cheaper goods. In this way both countries may gain from trade"

Now before I am asked what about when a country cannot produce anything relatively cheaper than another nation? I do not know, perhaps I can get my PhD on this topic . This is not a fix-all, I know, but when I talk about trade, I am not talking about corporations going in and taking advantage of the domestic market to reap profits (I know that is probably what will happen) but it is my ‘ideal’ that we can open up domestic countries, help them to first find out what they can produce, help them with the means to produce it, and then trade with them. Making any sense

This is getting long, and I am getting tired, so I will continue tommorrow!




------------------


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 08-28-2001).]

[Silver Cheetah]

Originally posted by Fljotsdale: 'Nuther thing you might like to know, Silver Cheetah: At the top of each posted page is a series of symbols. One of 'em says 'quote'. click on it and you will get a page with the comments of the person you want to reply to. Delete everything you are not answering, leave the rest, and post your reply below the final QUOTE mark. Makes life easier.

Fljotsdale, I really do appreciate your helpful comments on how best to use the site! This is my first time posting on a board ever, so some things are strange to me. I have got in a bit of a mess a couple of times, and have had to go back and delete posts cos they appeared twice. Ooh er! So, thanks for holding my hand (shall now attempt a smiley other than the standard smiley face - um, which one to go for...... sorry, got carried away there. Shall I be reprimanded for frivolous and wanton use of smileys?

[Silver Cheetah]

We are not as different as we make out to be. The biggest difference, I think, comes in our approach to the same problem! I will address your post at a later time, but I just wanted to say now, that I agree with almost everything you said, but of course disagree with some I think we are leaving from the same station but taking different trains to get to the same destination!

[/B][/QUOTE]

Good morning Moridin, (well, it’s morning for me! Not sure what time it would be down your way. I’ll have to check what the time difference is...)

Yes, I think you are right. We do have far more in common than I had first thought! That’s so great – and in a way, illustrates what we are talking about. Everyone has different views, but I think most people are coming from the same place deep down, i.e. they want what is best for the world as a whole. Obviously our views on what that ‘best’ is will differ according to our education, culture, upbringing and personal circumstances and experience.

When people talk to each other honestly and say what they really think and feel, it’s inevitable that the ‘things in common’ will out, as well as the things very definitely not. Communication is great, is it not! I luv it, I do....

I won’t reply to your posts now, as there is so much material already on the board for us both to respond to, and, as I said earlier, I’ve a friend coming to visit, plus some other things! However, I do want to discuss economic theory.. so I shall respond to your post on that very soon. I shall look forward to receiving your posts on some of the other points I made.

Having said that, I cannot resist........just a small point on economics to be going on with – do you not feel that the current model is incomplete? Although general economic theory measures the value of goods and services etc, it completely fails to take natural resources into account. I feel this is its major failing. (Although I believe there are branches of economics that do. Do you subscribe to these newer theories?) When GDP is calculated, the value of natural resources is not taken into consideration, however, it is my view that they should be, the more especially for resources which are very obviously finite. Economics doesn’t take any note of the poisoning of our water, air and earth, the degredation of our environment in general. I’d very much like your thoughts on this at some point! Also your thoughts on taxing the polluters, rather than taxing labour. But no rush!

[WOLFGIR]

Tough topic,I think that free global trade pacts CAn , obs CAN, be a good idea. Problem is that we still need a strong government in all countries or poor countries wil lhave problem with economy, strenghten their owncurrencies and such. Heve beenan issue already with invetsors looking for easy money and spoiled years of wrok to strengthen a economy..

Also, I believe in freedom, and the freedom to choose what I want to buy or not. And thus, I don´t believe in to controlled markets and I also wnt to know what I´m buying.

The major trouble with alot of these big Global little organisations are that they can´t come out in the open. Of several reasons. One the newly phnomenon that protests against it gets focused on the violence. People have a right to voice their opinion, but know, they destroy the opportunity for all the other BILLIONS!!!! of people trying to know and understand what they are up to, what impact they will have. All you hear is that there is streetviolence from opposers, and not much of what GAT or WOT or whatever is discussing.. The violent part is working for the major organisations cause they don´t have to share what is going on..

Another problem is the how things are to be worked out and how things re going to function? In the EU you have to buy from all the countries in EU even if people don´t want to buy it from the shelf, so are the restrictions going to undermine peoples free choice and becomming a "thought comtrolled" business and how are small companies and farms going to be able to compete?

Alot of thoughts stilol, I cant voice wether I like the idea or not yet, cause there is still so much more I want to know, and so many issues that has to be discussed before I can take a definate stand.

Right now, I´m just a bit pissed on the hole situation. i want information to be free as well. I don´t wnat to only here from the opposite parties in these duscussions. That doesn´t interest e at all. I´m tired of It´s going to e SO great. Or we are all doomed!!

I want to hear the simple bloody truth for once.. It´s going to be better with this, and worse with this. For you as a consumer this willl be the impact. For your country this will be the impact..

Sorry for the rants, but i think people in Genua can understand it. We have had the nice little meetings of top politicians and the opposers and seen the worst from both sides..

------------------

Be vevvy qwiet..I´m hunting wabbits...
Wolfgirs lair
once-upon-a-paper