SemiSteve
Champion Author
Tampa
Posts:6,749
Points:172,100
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Jan 9, 2009 1:15:07 PM
Perhaps those sci fi movies about the future where everyone is destitute are not so far fetched.
|
Mommaluv
Champion Author
Columbus
Posts:1,467
Points:216,440
Joined:Apr 2004
|
Message Posted: Sep 23, 2008 9:19:10 PM
How about another "War on poverty" run by the UN. It worked so well here in the States!
|
SemiSteve
Champion Author
Tampa
Posts:6,749
Points:172,100
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Aug 29, 2008 6:41:08 PM
In a few years the majority of the people on earth will live as rats.
How can we call ourselves civilized?
|
AC-302
Champion Author
Los Angeles
Posts:13,066
Points:1,745,575
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: Oct 8, 2007 1:07:10 PM
Again, Eastman Chemical isn't Eastman Kodak. OJ Simpson isn't Bob Hope. Why are you convoluting the issue? Can you not accept that there are enviornmentally responsible businesses out there? Or are all buisnesses inherently "evil" by their nature and definition?
What about 3M? They converted all their solvent-based processes to water-based many years ago. They're also getting out of many of their fluorochemicals due to POTENTIAL (not proven) environmental concerns? W.L. Gore also got rid of many of thier solvent-based processes some time ago (though it isn't as well publicized).
Environmental laws are VERY complicated. Having had to work with these laws for some years, I find that they are open to a certain degree of interpretation, as well. Here in SoCal we have the AQMD. The AQMD basically writes "rules" (that are, in effect, laws) can levy fines, and in essence, answers to nobody but themselves. Example: I can't use so much as one drop of isopropyl alcohol to clean a small precision part. But yet I can buy IPA at the drug store by the quart, or at the hardware store by the gallon. Instead of using obvious common sense, they "go after" companies they perceive as "being evil". Oh, and if they come in and see a minor paperwork violation (box checked wrong, address typo), they can fine you thousands of dollars. And often this is what they do to make money. It's easier to find a minor paperwork mistake than someone who is actually doing environmental damage (willfully or accidentally).
|
SemiSteve
Champion Author
Tampa
Posts:6,749
Points:172,100
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Oct 3, 2007 5:06:23 PM
AC-302: "Why do you blame this envronmentally responsible subsidiary (Eastman) for it's parent company's mistakes?"
If a name change exonerates blame you'd think OJ would have become Bob Hope.
"You make it sound like it's every company's "dream" to poison the water/air/ground in 3rd world countries. It's just not so."
I agree in previous post (SS)'...many in large corporations want to do the right thing. Not all corporations are evil...' The problem is short-sided thinkers who make policy. They don't think globally. Their department looks good at first on paper if they don't spend money to avert pollution. They get the raise and move on to another company (with glowing qualifications) before the damage comes out.
...
pizazz, Great post. Thanks for the heads up. Sounds like reading I would be interested in. Actually I've been wanting to dig into Greg Pallast for some time now. I was first interested in his book: "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy."
|
pizazz
Champion Author
Columbus
Posts:1,816
Points:58,965
Joined:Mar 2005
|
Message Posted: Aug 22, 2007 5:52:13 PM
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3397.htm
If I'm lucky............
|
pizazz
Champion Author
Columbus
Posts:1,816
Points:58,965
Joined:Mar 2005
|
Message Posted: Aug 22, 2007 5:49:33 PM
Hi, SemiSteve:
I learned why. It is because of the US government and corporations here.
Two must reads:
"Armed Madhouse" by Greg Palast (get his very latest edition, he keeps adding to it as info comes in) and
John Perkins new book, "The Secret History of the American Empire". It is his follow-up book of "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man", in which he told how he put countries in debt to World Bank and the US government, impoverishing the already poor and making the leaders filthy rich. How Third World leaders who actually were trying to help their citizens were killed by the US government to put into power leaders who would sell out their countries. The US has Chavez of Venezuela in it's nasty sights currently.Everyone should read these, educate themselves to realize that neither party should be elected in 2008. Our entire current government is corrupt and has been for decades. It's just now being published by those who did it and those who can.
Greg Palast is a BBC journalist and very thorough.
What I learned from John Perkins is that Third World citizens are much more knowledgeable about US government shenigans than it's own citizens.
It's time to put the remotes, bibles and balls down, turn off the soap operas and educate ourselves in order to elect a candidate that represents the US citizens.
AC-302:
US corporations ARE controlling the water in some countries. What used to be free to their citizens is now for sale at prices too high to afford. Bechtel, owned by a private family in San Francisco is exploiting these people.
"The Secret History of the American Empire:, John Perkins, pp.120-123
Now if I can get a link to be blue:[L=http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3397.htm][/L]
|
AC-302
Champion Author
Los Angeles
Posts:13,066
Points:1,745,575
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: Jul 11, 2007 9:50:19 AM
SemiSteve - look it up, The Eastman Company (formerly Eastman Chemcial Company) (NYSE: EMN) was spun off of The Eastman Kodak Company (NYSE: EK) some years ago. Why do you blame this envronmentally responsible subsidiary for it's parent company's mistakes? That's not right.
Oh, and if you really want to discuss environmentally harmful companies, let's not forget Union Carbide. They'd been poisoning New Jersey and other places for years. And the movie "Erin Brockovich" was about environmental damage caused by W.R.Grace and Beatrice Foods.
You make it sound like it's every company's "dream" to poison the water/air/ground in 3rd world countries. It's just not so.
Oh, and as to the water problem, we have oceans full of water. No problem. We just have to set up desalinization factories. New membrane technologies are showing very good results on small to medium scale. They have such a plant "on line" in Redondo Beach right now. Saw it on the news a couple years back..
|
SemiSteve
Champion Author
Tampa
Posts:6,749
Points:172,100
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Jul 10, 2007 4:51:44 PM
40% of the world population depends on drinking water from glacier melt-off. Yet glaciers are receding at an unprecedented rate due to global warming. Withint 50 years, these water sources will have seriously diminished. This will trigger a massive predicament which can only be foreshadowed by what is happening in Darfur and Niger, both of which once depended on the (now all but gone) Lake Chad in the center of Africa.
|
SemiSteve
Champion Author
Tampa
Posts:6,749
Points:172,100
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Jul 6, 2007 11:29:54 AM
Well this topic is really about world poor issues but since you brought up the company, let's see what kind of track record they had before tough US environmental regulations forced them to clean up their act:
"Eastman-Kodak was assessed the largest criminal fine ever in an environmental case in New York state and the fourth largest ever paid in the nation... ...The charges followed Kodak's February 1987 spill of 5,100 gallons of methylene chloride and its failure to obtain proper licensing for a hazardous waste facility. A 1988 disclosure of an underground chemical leak in a residential area near the hazardous waste facility alarmed residents and forced half of the area's more than 200 families to move out. "
Eastman Kodak has a record of environmental rape
Now simply consider that the US environmental laws are among the more advanced on the planet and extrapolate from there. The world poor, largely without such constraints as are found in the US, are at risk from rampant and greedy capitalization. True enough, many in large corporations want to do the right thing. Not all corporations are evil. But it only takes one idiot kid to pee in the public pool and it stinks just as much for every swimmer.
|
AC-302
Champion Author
Los Angeles
Posts:13,066
Points:1,745,575
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: Jul 6, 2007 10:02:41 AM
SemiSteve said: "The company could pollute the river with something that caused birth defects or took years to kill the fish, or never killed them at all but made them 'low level poisonous.' The people would get cancer in 20 years or something."
OK, but let's take another example. Eastman Chemical Company in Kingsport TN puts water back into the river AFTER it's gone through a wastwater treatment plant. The water they put back is actually drinking quality, which the river as a whole has not been for decades. Fish are actually starting to come back. The river was polluted with mercury some years ago, but not by Eastman. So often, companies clean up places and make them arable. Corporations aren't about "evil".. they're about PROFIT. If doing "good" is cost neutral or cost effective, it's their first choice. If doing something (let's say mineral extraction) is going to be harmful, the first thing they do is look at how to cause minimal impact. Also, they look at how to cost effectively prevent serious environmental damage. It's in their interest as they CAN be sued internationally in this day and age.
|
SemiSteve
Champion Author
Tampa
Posts:6,749
Points:172,100
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Jul 3, 2007 1:06:57 PM
Rethinking, I see my post was simplistic. The company could pollute the river with something that caused birth defects or took years to kill the fish, or never killed them at all but made them 'low level poisonous.' The people would get cancer in 20 years or something. But in the meantime, the company has already reaped its rewards and then moves on. The execs will make big bux and live out their lives in the lap of luxury. If the company is ever held to task for it, different people will have to deal with it. So the scoundrels who did the crime never have to pay for it.
|
AC-302
Champion Author
Los Angeles
Posts:13,066
Points:1,745,575
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: Jul 1, 2007 6:55:45 PM
True enough. But that isn't in anyone's best interest, now is it? They'll starve the very workers they need, and their families. Presumably they'll have poisoned their own water supply and now have to truck more in, also costing big bucks. Companies have found, in general, that protecting the environment is in their best interest. As a side, 3M went to all water-based processing some years ago for their products. They also are "bailing out" of the fluoropolymer surfactants business for similar reasons.
|
SemiSteve
Champion Author
Tampa
Posts:6,749
Points:172,100
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Jun 21, 2007 4:34:21 PM
If a group of native people lives off a river, eating the fish and so forth, and a mining company comes in and pollutes the river to the point that there are no more fish, a road is not going to help the native people eat.
|
SemiSteve
Champion Author
Tampa
Posts:6,749
Points:172,100
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Jun 21, 2007 4:31:15 PM
Perhaps the motivation may be hidden. If a company were to help a group of people out of poverty, maybe it could benefit by having a new source of dedicated workers?
|
AC-302
Champion Author
Los Angeles
Posts:13,066
Points:1,745,575
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: Jun 10, 2007 7:23:07 PM
Oh, and also another thought strikes me.. Isn't population growth exploding in the poorest areas of the World, and isn't population static or falling in most of the industrialized World?? About two years ago in THE ECONOMIST, I read that the population of Japan is experiencing negative growth among native Japanese. Apparently, at current rates of decline, there will be no ethnically Japanese people left in ~300 years (can't remember, it might have been 200!).
|
AC-302
Champion Author
Los Angeles
Posts:13,066
Points:1,745,575
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: Jun 6, 2007 9:47:14 AM
Steve - if there's not money to be made in "activity x", then what is any company's motivation to perform "x"? That said, if a group of people is starving, but are sitting on a tremendous mineral wealth, why is it "evil" for a company to come in and extract this? The company presumably kicks money back to the country's government in the form of leases and taxes. Also, they regularly build roads and housing, make infrastructure improvements in the area and employ locals. Oil and mining companies do this all of the time. And if they do so, aren't the locals better off??
|
SemiSteve
Champion Author
Tampa
Posts:6,749
Points:172,100
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Jun 5, 2007 4:02:02 PM
Thank you, galah.
Yes, it seems that even if an action is touted as being for the good of the poor, the hidden agenda is a benefit for some multinational corporation and it's benefactors. Meanwhile, the poor get poorer and the rich get richer. And not only do the poor get poorer, they are joined by many more poor so that their condition becomes even worse.
Sad to think that soon we will be returning to another "dark age". It will be a time when the majority of people on Earth have nothing and live as rats in the squalor. Meanwhile the rich will barricade themselves behing locks in gated subdivisions and use force of police to ensure the segregation of the unfortunates.
Just like in the feudal times.
This will be referred to as 'progress', although I'm not sure how the term applies.
Looks like this is an excellent time for the US to be dealing with the illegal immigration issue.
|
galah
Champion Author
Ontario
Posts:1,212
Points:18,700
Joined:Mar 2007
|
Message Posted: May 30, 2007 1:13:14 PM
Watched a programe regarding the part that the IMF play in creating terrible conditions for people of the third world countries.They IMF work hand in glove with the international companies to the detriment of the locals.
|
AC-302
Champion Author
Los Angeles
Posts:13,066
Points:1,745,575
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: May 4, 2007 9:45:20 AM
It isn't even the cost of transport. I'm sure the UN would even spring for that. It's the corrupt governments, feifdoms and warlords that steal the food aid for common people that bothers me.
|
KatmanDo
Champion Author
Detroit
Posts:7,314
Points:1,466,620
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: May 3, 2007 5:14:37 PM
"Does it make sense to you to pay American farmers NOT to produce?? It doesn't to me..."
Only if the farm's soil benefits from being "rested" from time to time; otherwise, I'm not an avid fan of the practice. OTOH, flooding the market with product so that prices drop sharply is probably not very clever either. Now if only the transportation costs of shipping surplus farm harvests to areas not able to grow sufficient food could be overcome...
|
AC-302
Champion Author
Los Angeles
Posts:13,066
Points:1,745,575
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: May 3, 2007 9:49:44 AM
True enough. They say Wikipedia is "better: since one now must join to edit the articles. When I look up topics, I almost always find LOADS of errors, especially in the scientific articles.
Oh, but for true free trade with 3rd world producers. Everyone would be the better for it. Heck, even our farmers could benefit from direct or "co-op" dealings with foreign countries for their produce. Does it make sense to you to pay American farmers NOT to produce?? It doesn't to me...
|
KatmanDo
Champion Author
Detroit
Posts:7,314
Points:1,466,620
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2007 4:29:49 PM
"By that definition, then I'd say "neoliberalism" isn't too liberal."
Lol. This wouldn't be the first time a term might actually mean the inverse of what one would expect. I do notice that Wikipedia places quotation marks around "liberalization" in its definition. Perhaps that is an important clue. (I also noticed there is some controversy about checking references provided in the article at Wikipedia; so the definition may not be universally accepted.)
|
AC-302
Champion Author
Los Angeles
Posts:13,066
Points:1,745,575
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2007 10:26:01 AM
By that definition, then I'd say "neoliberalism" isn't too liberal. It sounds more totalitarian, since it requires rigid government enforcement. Free trade, however, is usually good for emerging markets. Lack of free trade is, arguably, why Japan's economy has been in the toilet for 20 years...
|
KatmanDo
Champion Author
Detroit
Posts:7,314
Points:1,466,620
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 30, 2007 4:16:41 PM
"I was flustered to understand what is meant my neoliberalism. It seemed to be frequently used with in reference to the World Bank and the IMF.
Anybody venture a guess how that term applies here?"
I'm not sure myself, SemiSteve. "Neoliberalism" is not a term I'm real familiar with yet. Wikipedia breaks it down into an economic application and an international one. Under economic it states:
"Neoliberalism is associated with the Friedrich Hayek, economics departments such as that at the University of Chicago (and such professors as Milton Friedman and Arnold Harberger), and international organizations such as the International Monetary Fund (none of whom use the label "neoliberal"). In general, [it] represents a move away from the Keynesian economics that were dominant immediately after World War II. The philosophy promotes a "liberalization" of capital markets (thus called "neoliberal reform").
More specifically, [it] promotes ... free market capitalism, and free trade...
Opponents argue that neoliberalism is the implementation of global capitalism through government/military interventionism to protect the interests of multinational corporations, as well as the effects of free trade on wages and social structures."
Perhaps Davis & Schmidt (in the article I linked to) mean it to indicate when multi-national firms are allowed to set up unrestrained manufacturing &/or mineral extraction operations in third-world countries, primarily to export the product & resulting profits therefrom to wealthier nations.
Wikipedia on neo-liberalism (economic)
|
SemiSteve
Champion Author
Tampa
Posts:6,749
Points:172,100
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 29, 2007 7:00:19 PM
Katmando, that quote sounds very familiar. I think I recall reading that same passage in the Davis book.
This reference was made repeatedly.
I was flustered to understand waht is meant my neoliberalism. It seemed to be frequently used with in reference to the World Bank and the IMF.
Anybody venture a guess how that term applies here?
|
AC-302
Champion Author
Los Angeles
Posts:13,066
Points:1,745,575
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2007 12:12:56 PM
gotoneros said: "3rd world governments are mostly corrupt and take wealth for themselves, leaving the populace destitute. Very little can be done as long as this is the case."
Absolutely so. And it doesn't seem to matter if it's a military junta, or a Communist state. It seems to me the democratic ones are a little bit better off, financially. But again, until the leaders actually care about the people as something more than a resocurce to fleece, then it is sure to continue. It's depressing to think of the waste of human capital and mindpower in these regions...the things they could accomplish to help themselves if they (common folk) were allowed to organize. But as soon as they do something worthwhile, the government would take it away.
|
trainjunkie47
Champion Author
Detroit
Posts:9,018
Points:1,306,575
Joined:Aug 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2007 3:00:48 AM
For the vast majority of the poorest nations (the bottom 25%), there is little that can be done until their government is both willing and capable to make changes. Sadly, most of the international aid going into Africa is simply like throwing money into a fire. Corrupt governments stifle any possible economic developement. Many women continue to squeeze out 7, 9, 12 kids or more when they cannot feed, house, and medicate the ones they have already. Yes, the men are culpable as well.
|
KatmanDo
Champion Author
Detroit
Posts:7,314
Points:1,466,620
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 13, 2007 12:32:54 AM
"And to think that there is enough wealth to take care of everyone, yet it is horded by those who will never spend it during their lives."
I've just read an article on a Canadian website on religion which has a bit to say that is relevant to this topic:
"Led by the most powerful nation of the world, the United States, neo-liberalism continued to eviscerate the global poor through control of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. The poorest nations were made to pay a terrible price through structural adjustment programs. Needed capital for social infrastructure flowed north to pay off the massive interest on loans which local despots had accrued. As one wag noted, "The economy was great but the people were starving."
Social Justice and Faith Webzine April 2007
|
SemiSteve
Champion Author
Tampa
Posts:6,749
Points:172,100
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2007 6:45:05 PM
TadeuszK:
""Despite All Efforts" What efforts? "I was referring to the efforts such as the WHO, World Bank loans to impoverished nations, Peace Corps, Feed the Poor programs, Doctors without Borders, Child Sponsoring, etc. Also such efforts as nations embarking on their own projects designed to provide work, food, shelter, medical.
...
Also from the Davis book: If trends continue as they are now proceeding, by about 2025, the majority of the world population will live in poverty. After that, only the minority of humans on Earth will enjoy such 'luxuries' as basic sufficient wholesome food, electricity, clean water, formal shelter, police, medicine, etc. It is as if nations and governments will only apply to the few who 'enjoy' such advancements in society. Has the human race 'peaked out' as far as civilization goes? Are the majority of future humans destined to live as rats? Scary.
And to think that there is enough wealth to take care of everyone, yet it is horded by those who will never spend it during their lives. There is sufficient potential manpower to help all the needy if only it were applied, yet it is being used to further 'advanced society'. And the means to control population growth exists, yet is blocked by religion.
|
gotoneros
Champion Author
Syracuse
Posts:3,120
Points:635,880
Joined:Jan 2007
|
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2007 9:14:10 AM
3rd world governments are mostly corrupt and take wealth for themselves, leaving the populace destitute. Very little can be done as long as this is the case.
|
KatmanDo
Champion Author
Detroit
Posts:7,314
Points:1,466,620
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 9, 2007 9:50:08 PM
"...where US military recruiters were soliciting volunteers from another country."
Of course, part of the package was that those joining the US military would then relocate to the USA - & bring at least some family members with them.
|
KatmanDo
Champion Author
Detroit
Posts:7,314
Points:1,466,620
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 8, 2007 9:52:08 PM
"Can we even recruit non-citizen, non-residents into our military?"
Seems to me I saw a segment on one of the news-oriented tv shows within the past couple years or so where US military recruiters were soliciting volunteers from another country. Unfortunately, I don't recall which country it was. I got the impression it was a very limited program - & it was unusual enough to make it onto tv (which doesn't often highlight routine events). But if we're going to outsource so many other jobs offshore, why should the military function not be fair game too?
|
AC-302
Champion Author
Los Angeles
Posts:13,066
Points:1,745,575
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: Apr 8, 2007 3:46:05 PM
Can we even recruit non-citizen, non-residents into our military? Doesn't sound like a good idea to me. These folks probably need their men-folk to help farm. OTOH - even on a PFCs income they could probably support a family "back home" in central Africa..
|
KatmanDo
Champion Author
Detroit
Posts:7,314
Points:1,466,620
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 7, 2007 5:56:27 PM
Sounds like those impoverished areas must have the wrong religion, or else the Lord would bless them for their piety.
It also sounds like they provide an underutilized resource for US military staffing requirements. Any idea how many military recruiters have been assigned to sign up volunteers from those areas? With that many people apparently available, there's no excuse for falling short of recruitment goals.
|
TadeuszK
All-Star Author
Manitoba
Posts:984
Points:659,015
Joined:Nov 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 5, 2007 8:16:37 AM
"Despite All Efforts" What efforts?
|
AC-302
Champion Author
Los Angeles
Posts:13,066
Points:1,745,575
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: Apr 4, 2007 10:57:32 AM
What about that guy in India, who won the Nobel Prize in Economic for "Microcredit". That is, small scale credit given to folks to start small scale businesses? People need things, other people can make those things from indiginous materials. Sounds like a good economic model, in theory. They say it's making a dent in Indian poverty.
Now, before that, we need something else in Africa and worldwide. How do we instill in people a sanctity for life and human dignity?? Via religion? Education?? Somehow, I think we're losing it rapidly here in the US. It used to be you never heard about very many murders. Now it seems like there's several a day here in "gangland".
|