Movie About Globalization

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by AAHZ
Shiva,

if people "spit" on the nice guy... the the and guy comes out. i have been betrayed and humiliated on my own forum during an intersite conflict...

What intersite conflict?

[ZEE]

Spiffor,

i am going to take your advise...

and not take your "lambaste" at face value

[Spiffor]

Another word of advice:

if you think I lambasted you, you are going to have a very hard time in the OT. I'm one of the nicest posters here .

I expressed my doubts that this April's fools was an intersite conflict. Both sites talked about the other, and said unpleasantries. Oh the horror, the conflict, the war!

Generally speaking, you shouldn't take those forums too seriously. They're good for entertainment value, but they're the last place on earth where you should put your self-worth on the line. Basically, any of us can come under attack with a witty retort - more accurately, at 90% chance with a lazy retort.

On this forum, people rarely pwn others (and are rarely pwned as well), because it's so inane in its heart. In a pub, a strong man can scare off others into submission. In a forum, even a master debator won't scare off the others too much, except the thin-skinned. As a result, pwnages are infrequent.

There are only two way to effectively pwn someone on 'Poly:

- pick on a thin-skinned sucker, who'll cry to mommy and take his ball home (this is a favourite some of our members, and I disagree with them)

- let someone say something completely moronic and false, and then call him on that (preferably with something witty). It's the only noble pwnage IMO, and it absolutely requires people to self-pwn in the first place.


It is up to you not to be overly sensitive, lest you'll be the victim of the first pwnage-style, as our bullies pick on you for ****s and giggles.


Oh, and in case you feel I'm an ******* for writing this post, I'm not. This post took me ten minutes, only so that you know the basic unwritten rules of 'Poly, so that you can spend a good time here

[ZEE]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Oh, and in case you feel I'm an ******* for writing this post, I'm not. This post took me ten minutes, only so that you know the basic unwritten rules of 'Poly, so that you can spend a good time here

i dont think you are an ass or any other bad thing for writing that. i actually respect you for it. I FULLY and WHOLEHEARTEDLY admit (as i have before many times that nobody probably remembers or cares) that i have a bad temper and get upset and overreact quickly to things. I have a lot to learn and work on.

and thank you for taking the time to deal with a "noob" like me...

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Mauritania

Scotland

France

Auld Alliance

The place to go to see France/Scotland pwn the Rosbifs in the Five-nations league

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Mauritania

(we need to replace our lame, static with the shaking one)

[Spiffor]

Just add this page to your favourites

[LordShiva]

@ Drake

[Barnabas]

I think globalization is good for third world countries

Millions have gone out of poverty in India and China, and the hunger of those 2 giants has made commodities exported by third world countries more valuable.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Barnabas
I think globalization is good for third world countries

Millions have gone out of poverty in India and China, and the hunger of those 2 giants has made commodities exported by third world countries more valuable.

QFT

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Just add this page to your favourites

I noticed that the smiley over there (WTF is that place?) is called "avatar22196_7.gif". I am user number 22196 here, and it was my avatar before this one

[Dinner]

Originally posted by ískallin
I would'nt really classify them as "poor" countries. Plus they built up their economy and protected their local companies with protective tariffs before they opened up to globalization.

Peace

Nonsense. Neither of them built up much of anything behind those protective tarrifs. Rather they stagnated and became poorer. In 1947 India was the most developed and the richest country in Asia (outside of Japan) but it continually slide down the rankings because it's socialism strangled growth. In the 1990's the Indian government began a process of liberalization and the results speak for themselves.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by ískallin
Yea I agree with that. What I m saying is that the poorest countries (most of the african countries and some others) should be allowed to have protective tariffs to build up their own local companies so they will be ready for global competition. That's what India and China did and it worked for them.

What do you think most African countries tried from independence to the 1980's? Seriously, just about every single state put up huge tariffs and tried to create their own domestic industry but quickly found that their domestic markets were to small to support much industry, that the inflation caused by the tariffs created more poverty then wealth from new jobs, and that no outside investors were interested in making major capital expenditures in such basket case economic conditions. Bad government also played a part but the protectionist economic policies were a total failure. Only truly large economies can get away with that and even then it is less efficient then open markets.

[joncha]

Originally posted by LordShiva


I noticed that the smiley over there (WTF is that place?) is called "avatar22196_7.gif". I am user number 22196 here, and it was my avatar before this one

Eventis is YOU!

[ískallin]

What do you think most African countries tried from independence to the 1980's? Seriously, just about every single state put up huge tariffs and tried to create their own domestic industry but quickly found that their domestic markets were to small to support much industry, that the inflation caused by the tariffs created more poverty then wealth from new jobs, and that no outside investors were interested in making major capital expenditures in such basket case economic conditions. Bad government also played a part but the protectionist economic policies were a total failure. Only truly large economies can get away with that and even then it is less efficient then open markets.

Rubbish...
Economic growth in Africa 1960-1980 when they used protectionism was 34%, in South America it was 73%.
In the 1980's until now the economic growth shrunk by 23% in Africa and in South America its 6%. In the same time economic growth in the western countries grew like there was no tomorrow. Coincidence?

Of course economic growth isnt the only measurement of advance in the developing countries. If you look at avarage age, amount of poor and how nature is treated. If you look at that it becomes clearer yet. People live shorter, there are more poor people and nature is treated worse than ever.

The only good thing about globalization is that the western countries make money of it.

Peace