[Kazan]

I do notice some slight inconsistency to mikhael's views

while I don't agree with his grounds - we shouldn't bend over backwards to help them.  We shouldn't feel guilty for being where we're at.

That however doesn't mean we should take advantage of them at every opportunity possible.

[vyper]

You do all know that the pentagon has public war plans for the next seven years to horde food and supplies for the US in anticipation of worldwide famines and ecological disaster caused by climate change?

[Kazan]

yes... but said ecological disaster isn't coming

[Rictor]

Originally posted by Kazan
I do notice some slight inconsistency to mikhael's views

while I don't agree with his grounds - we shouldn't bend over backwards to help them.  We shouldn't feel guilty for being where we're at.

That however doesn't mean we should take advantage of them at every opportunity possible.

If you magically, suddenly got to where you are, no. But it didn't just happen, and its not being maintained at no cost. No cost you you, but there is a cost.

As I said, if you responisble for their suffering, you are responsible. The "we have no obligation to help them" stance is valid so long as you are not to blame for it.

You can choose not the help them, if you do not hurt them.  Once you hurt them, and continue to do so, you are obliged to help, unless you want to take mik's position.

[Kazan]

We are _not_ responsible for their sufering - despite assertions to the contrary

[Rictor]

Have you read my post on page 4? Tell me where I'm wrong.

It one thing to claim you're not responsible, and another to prove it.

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Kazan
I do notice some slight inconsistency to mikhael's views

while I don't agree with his grounds - we shouldn't bend over backwards to help them.  We shouldn't feel guilty for being where we're at.

That however doesn't mean we should take advantage of them at every opportunity possible.

Oh, fine, I give up.

I've been trying to play to the stereotype that Rictor seems to think we all fit into. The problem is that he's too dense to see that everything I've been saying has been pretty much 100% diametrically opposed to everything I've ever said on the subjects before.

[Kazan]

I find your post largely unsubstantiated and unsubstantiatable, some of it is ludacris.  What you are attributing to 'globalization' is a joke, sure that happens at times, but it's not due to 'globalization'

[mikhael]

Just so everyone is clear, the forgoeing bloodthirsty bull**** I've been spouting is precisely that: bull****. Rictor's been too dense to see that I was actively trolling him--or, giving him the benefit of the doubt, he was craftily trolling right back. I vote for the former, since the latter isn't in line with anything he said.

[Rictor]

Originally posted by mikhael


Oh, fine, I give up.

I've been trying to play to the stereotype that Rictor seems to think we all fit into. The problem is that he's too dense to see that everything I've been saying has been pretty much 100% diametrically opposed to everything I've ever said on the subjects before.

I call it as I see it. The above does not contradict some things which you've been saying of late, which IO assumed were not sarcastic.

You either give a **** about the problems facing the Third World, or you feel that "The third world exists to provide for whomever can exploit them the most efficiently. Its an excellent system.". Can't have it both ways.

_________

Kaz: unsubstantiated? would you like me to quote some examples? Again, you say they're unsubstantiated, and yet you have zero proff for that. I've read quite a bit on the subject, and both the proof and the logic used were quite real.

[Gank]

Originally posted by an0n
Aw, hell no.

America will be the first to be affected. It's one of the downsides of having the most wasteful and most foreign-dependant nation in the world.

snip

THAT's why America would be the first to get ****ed, and by internal dickheadery, if the world economy suddenly went belly-up.

On the ball there boy. And you'll see it happening too

[Kazan]

You see through distortion glasses

rotfl... you don't understand the word "unsubstantiated" - you don't need proof that something is unsubstantiated, saying something is unsubstantiated means you SEE NO PROOF FOR IT.. You're outside your vocabulary little boy

[Anecdote != Evidence]

[mikhael]

No Rictor, I don't give a **** about the Third World--or rather, they are of lower priority than the problems in my country. I'm a firm believer in taking care of your own house before you try to take care of anyone else's.

If you want to lead the charge to help the Third World, be my guest. Me, I'd rather take care of my own country. Its ****ed up and needs fixing and THAT MY JOB as a citizen. Don't go spouting off about being a citizen of the world, either: I'm not a citizen of the world. I'm a citizen of the United States. I think I've made that abundantly clear before.

If this is a position distasteful to you, tough. I won't debate  it, or discuss it further.

[Rictor]

Originally posted by Kazan
You see through distortion glasses

rotfl... you don't understand the word "unsubstantiated" - you don't need proof that something is unsubstantiated, saying something is unsubstantiated means you SEE NO PROOF FOR IT.. You're outside your vocabulary little boy

[Anecdote != Evidence]

Forgive me, I used a meaning other than the dictionary one. A grave crime.

And it is not true that the its unsubstantiated. There is proof, lots of it, so your claim that its unsubtantiated is false.

I'm not about to go hunting around the Net to dig up proof for you, sorry but your opinion just aint that important to me. Heres a quick scan of some proof I have sitting on my bookshelf, it'll have to do.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~dlebl/blasw.gif

[Kazan]

Sweatshops are not the RESULT of globalization, they're an ABUSE of globalization

so your claim is unsubstantiated due to misstatement

[Gank]

Sweatshops are not the RESULT of globalization, they're an ABUSE of globalization

[Rictor]

Originally posted by mikhael
No Rictor, I don't give a **** about the Third World--or rather, they are of lower priority than the problems in my country. I'm a firm believer in taking care of your own house before you try to take care of anyone else's.

If you want to lead the charge to help the Third World, be my guest. Me, I'd rather take care of my own country. Its ****ed up and needs fixing and THAT MY JOB as a citizen. Don't go spouting off about being a citizen of the world, either: I'm not a citizen of the world. I'm a citizen of the United States. I think I've made that abundantly clear before.

If this is a position distasteful to you, tough. I won't debate  it, or discuss it further.

As I said, help who you want. Just don't harm anyone else. Don't support those harming others. If you profit from actions that harm others, you are responsible.

To use your lumberjack analogy, the lumberjack would be responsible if he knew the 2x4 was going to be used to kill someone, and sold it anyway just to make a buck. You know that your support of the US government is going to cause people harm, and you give it anyway.

My objection to the Country First, Everyone else Second crap is that a country is random. The borders of the US are arbitrary. Where does America stop and Canada start? Are the people on the Canadian side of the Niagra Falls any different than people on the American side. What makes the people of America more deserving of anything than anyone else. Random geographic location. If tommorow, Mexico were to annex Texas, it would no longer be part of the US. By your logic, you would no longer give a **** about the people of Texas. And what has changed? Nothing. A different flag would be flown, and someone would make a scribble on a piece of paper. Thats it.

[Rictor]

Originally posted by Kazan
Sweatshops are not the RESULT of globalization, they're an ABUSE of globalization

so your claim is unsubstantiated due to misstatement

Whether something is the rule of the excpetion depends on how often it happens. If a man kills once, it can be forgiven. There is little reason to believe he is a "born and bred killer'. If he kill 100 times, it is reasonable to assume that he is a killer by nature.

If globalization brought glorious rewards to Third World countries, as it is "meant to", and only produced a few sweathsops here and there, you would be correct. But "globaliation" has brought harm and exploitation to Third World nations, time and time and time again. The track record speaks louder than the well meaning intentions espoused by economists.

No one has benefited from it, except the rich.

[Kazan]

you are incorrect - it is NOT the rule

you hear about the bad much more often than the good - use some critical thinking skills

furthermore: which is better A) No Job B) Low paying job

even worse - a great many of your 'sweatshop' hyperventalators (i'm not denying they exist, just that many people exaggerate them) forget to normalize their pay for THEIR countries economy

most of you compare their wage to the cost of living in a 1st world country so your're getting incorrect numbers and are hyperventalating about sweatshops because of it.  NORMALIZE IT FOR THEIR ECONOMY

[Bobboau]

what would happen if all our corperations were, lets say next monday, forbiden to opperate outsourced production facilities (ie sweat shops)? wouldn't there be a huge number of people no longer makeing anything at all, and becase they arn't getting that $.50 an hour, they can no longer aford the $.20 food, and they die.
yay anti-globalization!