I just went into walmart for the first time in months... I feel physically ill

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris


Most people want to live in democracies. Dictators are funded so that they protect the property rights of American corporations,.

How much money do you think we have? According to you the United States funds everybody and everything.

Hey I want to be funded. Yo, Congressman! Give me some funding and I'll be glad to do your bidding.........

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by General Ludd


But your own articles said that the alternative is sifting through a garbage dump. More then nothing is not neccisarily much (or even enough). How many times do I have to say this?

The alternative is GOING BACK TO HOW THEY WERE BEFORE, which is COMPLETELY POSSIBLE.

But they don't want to, because the sweatshops are better.

Sweatshops are an integral step of industrialization. Every single industrialized country today went through this step.

[PeteH]

Their land WASN'T destroyed... they are completely capable of going back to their old lifestyle.

Oh really? So, say I was, hmm, a resident of any of the islands used for nuclear testing, who wishes to return to my life in a quiet fishing village. Probably not going to work to well.

Or even right here at home, I suppose you would tell all the Indians livingon reservations that they shoudlnt complain, they can just go back to their old life, after we have deforested nearly the whole country, dammed and polluted the rivers, irradiated large areas with uranium mining and other nuclear waste, and will arrest them for trespassing if they try and gather food. But sure, they are free to go back to how they were.

If you think this same process hasn't occurred everywhere we have expanded into, you have your head in the sand.

[Kuciwalker]

Oh really? So, say I was, hmm, a resident of any of the islands used for nuclear testing, who wishes to return to my life in a quiet fishing village. Probably not going to work to well.

That one island used for nuclear testing, you mean. Yup, the people living there make up such a huge percentage of the sweatshop workforce.

Or even right here at home, I suppose you would tell all the Indians livingon reservations that they shoudlnt complain, they can just go back to their old life, after we have deforested nearly the whole country, dammed and polluted the rivers, irradiated large areas with uranium mining and other nuclear waste, and will arrest them for trespassing if they try and gather food. But sure, they are free to go back to how they were.

The native americans don't work in sweatshops, so it doesn't matter

Plus, we HAVEN'T deforested anywhere NEAR the entire country. We HAVEN'T irradiated large areas of the US ( ).

The US is a developed country, we're talking about Africa, Southeast Asia, etc, moron.

[Theben]

When she left I rounded the corner to see him put his hand in the air and pull it back into his chest and say 'yeah baby! that's how you make them feel like crap and keep them in line" then he looked up and saw me. I just walked away.

Another piss-poor manager. Seems there are too many out there these days. 2/3rds of teh time these guys are poorly trained.

I say sue them for fostering a "hostile work environment".

[Theben]

Originally posted by Kucinich

So it's the fault of the political system, not the corporations

So you're saying it's Bush's fault? Now you sound like Sava.

Corporations are not blameless for corrupt political systems that they support. Don't be naive, young skywalker.

Which is an economy, just a very primitive one

I was under the impression he was referring to a modern capitalist system. Of course there's always an economy of sorts, which is so obvious why mention it.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Theben
So you're saying it's Bush's fault? Now you sound like Sava.

I deserved that

Corporations are not blameless for corrupt political systems that they support. Don't be naive, young skywalker.

Let me rephrase it, then - it's a fault of the political system, not globablisation.

Which is an economy, just a very primitive one

I was under the impression he was referring to a modern capitalist system. Of course there's always an economy of sorts, which is so obvious why mention it.

Because many posters were assuming that there WASN'T any other economy

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Kucinich




The alternative is GOING BACK TO HOW THEY WERE BEFORE, which is COMPLETELY POSSIBLE.

So you think that's how they've been living for millions of years - sifting through garbage dumps?

Their old way of life isn't possible anymore, and those who want to go back can't.

Their land WASN'T destroyed... they are completely capable of going back to their old lifestyle.

Regardles of their land - which has been polluted quite thouroghy - their previous society has been destroyed. Farming isn't as profitable as it once was, and they are probably expected to have wages equivelent of the people working 16 hour a day slave labour, so their cost of living has gone up.

I have yet to see any evidence from you or Imran that sweatshop workers can actually afford things like luxuries and even retirement with the 'generous' wages they are given.

The native americans don't work in sweatshops, so it doesn't matter

No, we put them to work in the mines and lumber industries instead. Added bonus - we get to dump the waste on their land and not have to worry about it.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by General Ludd
So you think that's how they've been living for millions of years - sifting through garbage dumps?

No, duh, it's called AGRICULTURE. Agricultural subsidies in first-world nations don't prevent sustenance farming.

Their old way of life isn't possible anymore, and those who want to go back can't.

Of course it is.

Regardles of their land - which has been polluted quite thouroghy - their previous society has been destroyed. Farming isn't as profitable as it once was, and they are probably expected to have wages equivelent of the people working 16 hour a day slave labour, so their cost of living has gone up.

They can go back to sustenance farming. They can't go back to something more than that (selling the food) simply because agricorporations, with or without subsidies, are far more efficient at turning out superior quality food at a lower price. Unless you somehow think it is morally wrong to offer a better product for a lower price, the agricorporations are completely blameless.

I have yet to see any evidence from you or Imran that sweatshop workers can actually afford things like luxuries and even retirement with the 'generous' wages they are given.

They can afford more than they could before.

No, we put them to work in the mines and lumber industries instead. Added bonus - we ge to dump the waste on their land and now have to worry about it.

Again: the native americans don't live in a third-world country. They are completely unrelated to the discussion.

[General Ludd]

Of course it is.

Then I ask you the same thing I asked Imran, why are so many third world farmers starving?

And why are people sifting through garbage dumps rather then sustaining themselves?

They can go back to sustenance farming. They can't go back to something more than that (selling the food) simply because agricorporations, with or without subsidies, are far more efficient at turning out superior quality food at a lower price.

Then how do they pay for their land and taxes?

They can afford more than they could before.

And how much could they afford 'before' (without)? Nothing

More then nothing isn't much!

Again: the native americans don't live in a third-world country. They are completely unrelated to the discussion.

I don't know, alot of native reservations could be compaired to third world countries.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by General Ludd
Then I ask you the same thing I asked Imran, why are so many third world farmers starving?

Because "starvation" is pretty much the default for a primitive civilization. We'd probably say a lot of the ancient egyptians were "starving" too. It's all relative.

Plus there've been some droughts and stuff. Again, nothing that wouldn't have happened without the sweatshops.

And why are people sifting through garbage dumps rather then sustaining themselves?

Because they moved to the city.

Then how do they pay for their land and taxes?

Do most African countries even have property tax?

And how much could they afford 'before' (without)? Nothing

More then nothing isn't much!

So? The point is that they are better off, however slightly. More than nothing is - get this - [/i]more than nothing[/i].

I don't know, alot of native reservations could be compaired to third world countries.

Not really. Gambling is not a primary industry of third world countries, nor are the reservations "industrializing"

[loinburger]

Originally posted by General Ludd
More then nothing isn't much!

Sure it is. It's an infinity-percent increase.

[General Ludd]

This is a really strange debate. The people I am arguing with seem to agree with all of my points. (and actually back them up more then I do. )

Both Kucinich and Imran seem to agree that without the sweatshops, people would be starving. So what, exactly, is the argument here?

I don't think people even know what we're arguing anymore, so let's go back...



The thing that spawned this whole sub-argument was my comparison of sweat-shop workers to slaves. My point was, that they met all the credentials of a slave, only that they are forced to work through economic force rather then brute force. Now, if you agree that they would be starving without the sweatshops, how can you say that they have a freedom of choice (ie. a freedom to starve)?


I also said that saying sweatshop workers should be thankful for their jobs is like saying slaves should be thankful to their masters - how is that not a valid comparison? If primitive societies are starving by default, as Kucinich says, the africans should of been thankful for the chance to go to america and pick cotton and be fed. Just as these people should be thankful to work in sweatshops, and be fed.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by GhengisFarb

How much money do you think we have? According to you the United States funds everybody and everything.

Hey I want to be funded. Yo, Congressman! Give me some funding and I'll be glad to do your bidding.........

Recent figures showed that America was offering military help to at least 100 countries in the world. Plus, aren't they the #1 weapon manufacturer?

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by General Ludd
The thing that spawned this whole sub-argument was my comparison of sweat-shop workers to slaves. My point was, that they met all the credentials of a slave, only that they are forced to work through economic force rather then brute force. Now, if you agree that they would be starving without the sweatshops, how can you say that they have a freedom of choice (ie. a freedom to starve)?

You're absolutely right. People seem to think that you can freely chose to starve. I've given up arguing with them.