The USA thread

Author Message
flag gibson19
Posted: Feb 20, 2009 at 12:02 Quote
While I agree that capitalism rarely has the desire to improve environmental situations... If the market (aka you, me, the rest of the worlds consumers) demanded that we wanted an eco friendly business they would gladly comply or simply die out... Thats the beauty of capitalism... If the consumers want a product someone is gonna step up to the plate and provide it...

Also you have to remember that capitalism creates wealth... Meaning it creates jobs in third world countries... Sure the labor is cheap but at legitimate factories they typically make well above minimum wage
flag llessurretneprac
Posted: Feb 20, 2009 at 12:05 Quote
gibson19 wrote:
While I agree that capitalism rarely has the desire to improve environmental situations... If the market (aka you, me, the rest of the worlds consumers) demanded that we wanted an eco friendly business they would gladly comply or simply die out... Thats the beauty of capitalism... If the consumers want a product someone is gonna step up to the plate and provide it...

Also you have to remember that capitalism creates wealth... Meaning it creates jobs in third world countries... Sure the labor is cheap but at legitimate factories they typically make well above minimum wage

Do you think forced assimilation into a cash market is a good thing?
What about people that are forced to grow cash crops, or forced to change their way of living to provide goods to 1st world economies? (i.e. diamonds, coffee, dog food, etc...)
flag bonfire
Posted: Feb 20, 2009 at 12:11 Quote
How about this. We don't hire any foreign labour and they can just sit in shear squalor whilst the countries that will work for us, actually have some wealth.

They grow cash crops because it puts food on their table, they have a choice, they aren't forced to do anything, yet another benefit of the Capitalist society, but if they want food they need to grow something someone will want to buy.
flag llessurretneprac
Posted: Feb 20, 2009 at 12:15 Quote
bonfire- wrote:
How about this. We don't hire any foreign labour and they can just sit in shear squalor whilst the countries that will work for us, actually have some wealth.

They grow cash crops because it puts food on their table, they have a choice, they aren't forced to do anything, yet another benefit of the Capitalist society, but if they want food they need to grow something someone will want to buy.

That is not a choice. That is similiar to saying, "If you don't do this, I'll shoot you. You have a choice."

“We are forced to grow pineapples and bananas for other people, while there is less corn to feed our own populations. It is obvious that we are on the wrong track, that we are abusing our natural resources.” - Costa Rican farmer

The principle motivation of U.S. political imperialism has been to gain direct access and control over the remaining indigenous natural resources, including: land, timber, minerals, petroleum, wildlife and water. To gain access the U.S. has practiced subterfuge, manipulation and direct confiscation in conjunction with national and multinational corporations. Indigenous territories have been used to locate hydroelectric dams, mines for uranium, coal, copper and other metals essential to U.S. industry and military needs; petroleum wells and pipelines and other energy producing facilities. Except in only rare instances have these business efforts directly benefitted indigenous populations. Indeed, these efforts of production and business development have forced indigenous populations to depend on the U.S. cash economy while their traditional economies have collapsed.
flag bonfire
Posted: Feb 20, 2009 at 12:21 Quote
They can stop whenever they want. No-one is holding a gun to their head. The local governments bid for contracts so that there is some cash-flow through the country. So they can build roads, schools, and other projects. Also as in life, as terrible as this sounds, someone has to finish last. If the whole globe was 1st world nations, do you have any idea how expensive goods would cost?

They would be insane. Then we would have to resort to a sort of State run production. Which would suck ass.
flag bonfire
Posted: Feb 20, 2009 at 12:23 Quote
Relying upon the US economy is atleast somewhat reliable as at least you have a stable government. You act like what the US does in these countries is atrocious. I would like to direct your eyes to what these foreign leaders have done to their own people. North Korea, is refusing to rely on the US economy, and look where they stand currently. Yep, I would sure want to be apart of that.
flag llessurretneprac
Posted: Feb 20, 2009 at 12:30 Quote
bonfire- wrote:
Relying upon the US economy is atleast somewhat reliable as at least you have a stable government. You act like what the US does in these countries is atrocious. I would like to direct your eyes to what these foreign leaders have done to their own people. North Korea, is refusing to rely on the US economy, and look where they stand currently. Yep, I would sure want to be apart of that.

I'm not saying the US is the only bad country. And quite honestly, I couldn't give a shit about the price of goods. And yes, these people would still be screwed in the hands of "their own" governments.

But NAFTA, FTAA, and the WTO certainly aren't helping them.
flag llessurretneprac
Posted: Feb 20, 2009 at 12:32 Quote
bonfire- wrote:
They can stop whenever they want. No-one is holding a gun to their head. The local governments bid for contracts so that there is some cash-flow through the country. *snip*

Indigenous nations have few alternatives for avoiding
economic exploitation. These alternatives may be considered:

1. Close indigenous territories to external development by
legal means, blockades or by force.

2. Establish inter-tribal economic linkages for the production
and distribution of goods and services to replace U.S.
imposed economic support.

3. Replace the U.S. currency system with an internal indigenous
currency system based on indigenous labor and indigenous
raw material potential.

4. Institute nationalization laws over production and raw
materials to directly control corporate activities within
indigenous territories.
flag AqueousBeef
Posted: Feb 20, 2009 at 17:28 Quote
This thread just refuses to die. I like it.
flag gibson19
Posted: Feb 20, 2009 at 19:48 Quote
llessurretneprac wrote:

That is not a choice. That is similiar to saying, "If you don't do this, I'll shoot you. You have a choice."

“We are forced to grow pineapples and bananas for other people, while there is less corn to feed our own populations. It is obvious that we are on the wrong track, that we are abusing our natural resources.” - Costa Rican farmer


K heres the thing... When two countries trade... Both end up with more resources... so in this case costa rica is better at making pineapple and bananas and America is better at making corn... So if they both specialize and then trade their goods they can end up with more than they could have produce on its own...
flag carnell
O+
Posted: Feb 20, 2009 at 20:39 Quote
bonfire- wrote:
How about this. We don't hire any foreign labour and they can just sit in shear squalor whilst the countries that will work for us, actually have some wealth.

They grow cash crops because it puts food on their table, they have a choice, they aren't forced to do anything, yet another benefit of the Capitalist society, but if they want food they need to grow something someone will want to buy.

But The wealthy and powerful have crerated the market, There was capitalism in the world when the natives of north america lived by the selves and in many cases flourised all while being isolated from the european capitalists.

and lets be realistic, these people are froced since there are no alternatives if they choose not to work for there small wages they don't work period.
flag carnell
O+
Posted: Feb 20, 2009 at 20:42 Quote
gibson19 wrote:
llessurretneprac wrote:

That is not a choice. That is similiar to saying, "If you don't do this, I'll shoot you. You have a choice."

“We are forced to grow pineapples and bananas for other people, while there is less corn to feed our own populations. It is obvious that we are on the wrong track, that we are abusing our natural resources.” - Costa Rican farmer


K heres the thing... When two countries trade... Both end up with more resources... so in this case costa rica is better at making pineapple and bananas and America is better at making corn... So if they both specialize and then trade their goods they can end up with more than they could have produce on its own...

yeah but in many cases cost rican (im speaking hypothetically) land is bought by multi-national countries and then released to farmers to grow the goods and at low wage. So the wealthy and powerful have taken over a natives resource and exploited them. Had the multi national company not come, the costa rican farmer would be free to sell or trade his to whom he pleased.
flag llessurretneprac
Posted: Feb 21, 2009 at 1:47 Quote
gibson19 wrote:
llessurretneprac wrote:

That is not a choice. That is similiar to saying, "If you don't do this, I'll shoot you. You have a choice."

“We are forced to grow pineapples and bananas for other people, while there is less corn to feed our own populations. It is obvious that we are on the wrong track, that we are abusing our natural resources.” - Costa Rican farmer


K heres the thing... When two countries trade... Both end up with more resources... so in this case costa rica is better at making pineapple and bananas and America is better at making corn... So if they both specialize and then trade their goods they can end up with more than they could have produce on its own...

But people cannot live off pineapples and bananas... I don't think you understand what a cash crop is.
flag scrippsranchDJ
Posted: Feb 21, 2009 at 1:51 Quote
gnarnell wrote:
gibson19 wrote:
llessurretneprac wrote:

That is not a choice. That is similiar to saying, "If you don't do this, I'll shoot you. You have a choice."

“We are forced to grow pineapples and bananas for other people, while there is less corn to feed our own populations. It is obvious that we are on the wrong track, that we are abusing our natural resources.” - Costa Rican farmer


K heres the thing... When two countries trade... Both end up with more resources... so in this case costa rica is better at making pineapple and bananas and America is better at making corn... So if they both specialize and then trade their goods they can end up with more than they could have produce on its own...

yeah but in many cases cost rican (im speaking hypothetically) land is bought by multi-national countries and then released to farmers to grow the goods and at low wage. So the wealthy and powerful have taken over a natives resource and exploited them. Had the multi national company not come, the costa rican farmer would be free to sell or trade his to whom he pleased.

If the land is owned by the farmers wouldn't they have the option to not sell their land? And if they did sell their land wouldn't it be for a large sum of money? Why would they sell their land if 1. they don't make stable profit or 2. it leaves them in a shittier situation then before.

 


Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv42 0.013854
Mobile Version of Website