Skip to main content

Reply to "New Black Conservative Website"

quote:
Originally posted by Kweli4Real:

See "Free-trade Globalist" mesure everything in terms of dollars flowing to the top ... culture, quality of life and economic casualties be damned.

I thought that we, as a people-a society, had progressed beyond the "economic ends being justified by any exploitive means", blind greed mentality.


It really takes a true spin artist to take an unprecedented decrease in poverty and turn it into a bad thing. Unbelievable. It's sad that folks who sit here with all kinds of comforts are opposed to others striving for those same things. And suggesting that these folks would be better off with less choices... in a barter society? lol... now I remember why I got bored with this board a while back.

Every rich nation started off poor like the nations I mentioned. They all had to develop and go through what many nations are going through now. There aren't short cuts, so I don't know what any of you are suggesting in the alternative. (barter? - Kweli; hunter/gatherer? - Noah). Now, there probably are (very few) people who would like to live like that if they had a choice. Economic development gives them more choices. That is the real issue - choices, not necessarily money.

quote:
Originally posted by Kweli4Real:
Never mind the fact that prior to the sweatshop, these 5, 6 and 7 year olds didn't need $10.00 a day

Prior to the sweatshop the girls were probably working for less, if that makes you feel better. Otherwise, they would not be working to begin with. The reason parents put their children to work in these countries is that they have to. Without these jobs, many of these children, especially the females, are forced into prostitution or other revolting circumstances. That's not theory - it is a fact.

I'll post an article for you about what former sweatshop critics have said after seeing the plain as day reality of the countries in which the sweatshops exist, and why sweatshops, while not being western standard workplaces, are better than the alternatives for people who work there and are providing new opportunities where none existed before. You'll try to manufacture some reason that they are better off having no choice but to live as barterers, but when people take these jobs in order to do better, they are telling you that they don't want to live like barterers. Who are you to tell them they shouldn't have the choice?

quote:
Originally posted by Yemaya:
The only people who are really making money on Free Trade are business people, like CEOs of the companies who willingly turn a blind eye to abuses.

Wasup, Yemaya. I knew people would ignore blatant facts. Millions of people in China and India have choices that their previous generations couldn't dream of. Labor conditions can be horrible in some places, just like they were in this country is it went through development - the same development that allows us to carry on this very debate. And just to make it clear, I don't support business that coerce individuals in any way shape or form. They should be dealt with. Coercion by definition is irreconcilible with free trade.

quote:
Originally posted by Noah the African:
The first thing that you need to note about Hong Kong is that it was a City-state, like Singapore. These small populations are easily turned around by direct foreign investment from large wealthy nations, pumping in billions of dollars annually.

... Just like Chinese and other foreign business pump in billions of dollars to the US annually. You forgot to note that in your trade deficit point, as does Paul Craig Roberts. And the freer the economy, combined with recognition of rule of law brings in such investments. The same goes for large nations as does for small ones.

quote:
Originally posted by Noah the African:
Second, the growth in China comes at the expense of growth the in USA, as much of their growth is tied to the USA.


You have still not proven that China's growth comes "at the expense" of the USA. Both economies are still growing simultaneously, although China is growing faster due to economic measures that are in many ways freer than those in the US. Another job in China does not mean one less job in the United States. Another 50 jobs in China doesn't mean one less in the US. Why? Because demand is not fixed. When people buy cheaper goods, they have more money left over to consume/invest more. That saved money does not disappear, it creates more jobs. That's why unemployment in the US has shrunk even in the midst of China's rapid development.

Paul Craig Roberts is a decent writer, and I agree with him on many things. But on trade, he is dead wrong.

quote:
Originally posted by Noah the African:
The only way American employment levels can be maintained is if people are buying the goods and services that we produce more than we buy the goods and services that others produce. All one has to do is check the nations balance of accounts ledger to notice that we as a nation buy much more from others than they buy from us, with the biggest gap being with CHINA.


The italicized portion of your quote simply is not true. Trade "deficits" do not bring on less employment. It isn't the case in America and it isn't the case elsewhere.
×
×
×
×