How else can we screw the third world?

eamonnm79

Ok I know first world people are smarter but come on, seriously we have to stop taking advantage of the third world.
Saw this in the Irish Times today
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0415/1224244721224.html
I enclose the article here to see if anyone has any economic issues with the figures used in the article.
You can add weapons sales, first world market control(first world exports to third world are a lot more expensive than third world exports to first world) to this too.

This expoitation is at total varience to the wishes of ordinary people in the first world.

I can only conclude that corporate profit motive allows us to actively persue further injustice and overrides our normal moral inclination to desist.
Capitalism is an amoral system but it certainly does nothing to disincentivise cruelty, which is its biggest flaw IMHO.

In fairness to Ireland We are not involved in arms sales on a large scale (Declan Ganley and Ulich macavadey aside) and are one of the biggest donaters as a % of GDP however the larger colonialists have never really stopped striping the former colonies of their assets, They just do it now without the need for plantation (excluding the american desire for ever more army bases)
Any problems we have are miniscule compared to the ordeals these people face.

Tricity Bendix

Quite a wide spread of grievances you've got there. I'll add my 2c to the fringe ones first.

weapons sales

The first world may supply weapons, but it is the Third World that demands and uses them. Besides, guns in the right hands lead to greater national security, making it easier to do business and attract investment.

first world market control(first world exports to third world are a lot more expensive than third world exports to first world)

Not quite sure what exactly you're getting at, but it is true that the Third World exports mainly commodities, which are simple enough to produce, whereas developed economies produce far more complex goods that are not so easy to produce. The simple laws of scarcity would indicate that complex goods from developed countries will be more expensive than simple commodities.

Capitalism is an amoral system but it certainly does nothing to disincentivise cruelty

Any system of governance is only as cruel as the people who live within it. Capitalism has always operated within a legislative and regulatory framework designed by the state. The citizenry are its conscience. We set the rules by which the economy operates.

As for the sustentative issue, that of tax avoidance via dodgy multinational set-ups, I agree it’s a problem. I completely disagree with the comparison made to the slave trade in that article. This is only one of a plethora of ways that firms dodge the taxman, and not just in the developing world. But so long as wages in KPMG are a multiple of what those in Revenue, the private sector will continue to out-fox the government.

Time Magazine

eamonnm79 wrote: »

Ok I know first world people are smarter

East Asians are smarter than Europeans.

Capitalism is an amoral system but it certainly does nothing to disincentivise cruelty, which is its biggest flaw IMHO.

Of course capitalism disincentivises cruelty. There are plenty of products that I refuse to purchase because of the manner in which they're produced.

eamonnm79

Tricity Bendix wrote: »

Quite a wide spread of grievances you've got there. I'll add my 2c to the fringe ones first.


The first world may supply weapons, but it is the Third World that demands and uses them. Besides, guns in the right hands lead to greater national security, making it easier to do business and attract investment.


Not quite sure what exactly you're getting at, but it is true that the Third World exports mainly commodities, which are simple enough to produce, whereas developed economies produce far more complex goods that are not so easy to produce. The simple laws of scarcity would indicate that complex goods from developed countries will be more expensive than simple commodities.


Any system of governance is only as cruel as the people who live within it. Capitalism has always operated within a legislative and regulatory framework designed by the state. The citizenry are its conscience. We set the rules by which the economy operates.

As for the sustentative issue, that of tax avoidance via dodgy multinational set-ups, I agree it’s a problem. I completely disagree with the comparison made to the slave trade in that article. This is only one of a plethora of ways that firms dodge the taxman, and not just in the developing world. But so long as wages in KPMG are a multiple of what those in Revenue, the private sector will continue to out-fox the government.

The citizenry are the conscience but the rules are set by the employees of companys who negotiate the terms of exporting.
Because its their job to get the best deal they can, they can justify using their emmence power advantage over those selling the raw materials.
I remember watching a documentary on a mangetout plantation in Africa.
The pickers got 1 cent per bag the farmer (a white) guy got 15 pence per bag including packaging and cost of export. Tesco sold the Mangetout for 99 pence.
Another example is the Chinese factory that make Ireland Jerseys.
Umbro give the factory owner 1 euro for every Jersey later sold to punters in Ireland for €50

eamonnm79

The Economist wrote: »

East Asians are smarter than Europeans.

Of course capitalism disincentivises cruelty. There are plenty of products that I refuse to purchase because of the manner in which they're produced.

Yeah but those products are usually cheaper than the fair alternitive so most people go for the cheap option. The fact its on the shelf means someone is buying them.

asdasd

remember watching a documentary on a mangetout plantation in Africa.
The pickers got 1 cent per bag the farmer (a white) guy got 15 pence per bag including packaging and cost of export. Tesco sold the Mangetout for 99 pence.

I remember once looking ay my paycheck. I got 10K for a project. The company made 100K. start a riot.

there is no reason why the third world cant stop just producing commodities, and start actually manufacturing. China can do it with little or no natural resources.

book smarts

The Economist wrote: »

East Asians are smarter than Europeans.

Source?

asdasd

Source?

Come now. this is a respectable website.

Time Magazine

book smarts wrote: »

Source?

It's a source I don't necessarily agree with, but it's also the source that I presume the OP was referring to.

Lynn, R. (2006) Race Differences in Intelligence.

leninbenjamin

asdasd wrote: »

I remember once looking ay my paycheck. I got 10K for a project. The company made 100K. start a riot.

there is no reason why the third world cant stop just producing commodities, and start actually manufacturing. China can do it with little or no natural resources.

in theory; sure. in practice; not a hope that could happen without outside intervention.

one of the biggest problems is the degree to which foreign aid acts as a revenue stream to keep corrupt governments in place.

another problem rarely mentioned is international patent laws limit the range of products a 3rd world country can legally manufacture. the cost of getting and enforcing a worldwide patent skews it totally in favour of Western countries. Also, a lecturer of mine once stated that it's not uncommon for Westerners to arrive in the guise of anthropologists to poorer regions with the purpose of simply finding new patents from folk medicines and the like.