Tweet
Originally posted by Giancarlo
View Post
-
Maybe large retail stores became the norm because it's more efficient than having lots of small retail stores?
-
Free trade has nothing to do with whether or not those with power/wealth use their power/wealth to help or hurt other people.Originally posted by Giancarlo View Post
Wages in the countries you are talking about are governed by other, mostly domestic, policies and by social norms. Minimum wages, unionization, redistribution, corruption, etc. The only effect free trade has there is to raise the potential ceiling for wages by generating more overall wealth... which is just potential. Those other factors are going to determine how much, if any, of that potential is realised.Explain this.. If free trade is so awesome why has it had no positive impact on wages in the countries it robs?
As I've said before, wages in the developed countries in industries which were previously protected and are not able to adapt are the ones which show a negative impact from free trade as they are now in competition rather than being protected from it.Comment
-
Easy for one to claim free trade did that rather than internal changes.Originally posted by The Mad Monk View PostFor there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)Comment
-
Free trade is essentially another tool for the elite to oppress and take control preventing anyone from moving up.Originally posted by Aeson View Post
Except free trade doesn't do that. That's just a myth. Free trade allows corruption to flourish. Again think MNCs.Wages in the countries you are talking about are governed by other, mostly domestic, policies and by social norms. Minimum wages, unionization, redistribution, corruption, etc. The only effect free trade has there is to raise the potential ceiling for wages by generating more overall wealth... which is just potential. Those other factors are going to determine how much, if any, of that potential is realised.
Free trade isn't the solution, and isn't even a good idea.For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)Comment
-
You are confusing free trade with globalization, and ignoring that multinational corporations existed (and were worse than they are now) well before free trade became a common thing.Comment
-
Free trade simply gave them another tool to oppress and steal.Originally posted by Aeson View PostFor there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)Comment
-
How? What mechanism of free trade allows them to oppress and steal better than if there wasn't free trade?Comment
-
It allows them to fleece lands of their natural resources, leave the residents of that land dirt poor and often leave them with a destroyed environment.Originally posted by Aeson View Post
Free trade is the opposite of environmentalism and this is why I oppose such a thing.
Notice I am not against trade, but only if it is fair and there is proper oversight.
Free trade is capitalism run amuck. We have a lot of problems in this world, and while bad governance may be part of it... so is free trade.
I guess you're seeing the left wing streak in me with this issue. I might be more benign on other issues, but not this one.For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)Comment
-
"Free trade" doesn't mean the same thing as "laissez-faire".Comment
-
He is constantly confused about terms and using terms he does not know the definition of. It is one of the reasons he cannot form an intelligent argument on this topic.Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.Comment
-
I won't respond to that insult with another insult.
I'm more than capable of understanding this subject and I have a significant amount of education/background in this subject. I did study economic systems and what free trade is all about. I am all for trade, as long as it is fair.
I'm not confused about anything. I just have a vastly different world view than you.For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)Comment
-
Free trade is not incompatible with environmental regulations, workplace safety regulations, or higher wages. In fact applying free trade principles to labor ... treating labor as something to be freely traded in other markets ... would quickly fix the worst offenses against labor.Originally posted by Giancarlo View Post
What you are ignoring is that everything you are heaping onto free trade happened and happens to a greater extent in situations without free trade. Free trade also Spurs technological advancement and results in overall more wealth, increasing the potential for higher wages and standards of living.Comment
-
I don't agree at all, but we will keep going back and forth on this. What spurs technological advancement is internal investment, often by government funding (ARPANet).Originally posted by Aeson View Post
I will agree to disagree on this matter.For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)Comment
-
Again, free trade is not mutually exclusive with investment into science. Pretending there is only one positive factor on technological advancement is obviously ludicrous.Comment
-
Private industry is more than capable of doing research and making advancements when the potential for profit is involved. The Specialty Chemicals industry is all about that.No, I did not steal that from somebody on Something Awful.Comment
Comment