Home page logo
/

interesting-people logo Interesting People mailing list archives

more on OECD on employment protective laws
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:25:49 -0400



Begin forwarded message:

From: Frode Hegland <frode () hegland com>
Date: April 17, 2006 11:47:03 AM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] OECD on employment protective laws

On 11 Apr 2006, at 19:35, David Farber wrote:
Russ Nelson writes: Globalization is nothing new ... and during that time wages have risen, not fallen

Though of course not uniformly. Some place win (like the British Empire being efficient enough to make cloth that they could ship them back to India and pretty much eradicate the local industry. (This made the British India Company more powerful than the British Empire for a while! Yes, even the British Empire was an international corporate affair, as much as a government expansion). This of course happens often, to degrees. And it swings back and forth between regions on the rise, and regions on a plateu.

But when the winners become monopolistic, this breaks down.

Within a capitalistic country regulation is need to keep large companies from becoming monopolies. There is no such regulation on a world-wide basis, only the WTO which is a representative of the monopolistic countries, not of all countries.

One example of this is the monopolistic trade barriers the US and Europe have against Africa, which removes five times the amount of potential trade income than Africa receives in aid (please help me if you can remember who pointed this out, I cannot find the name right now, but it was not a hippe, it was someone from the World Bank, I think).

In fact, the trade imbalance with Africa is so bad that locally grown produce is more expensive in many places, than US imports due to US subsidies.

Please, this is my current understanding, if anyone would like to correct any of this, please do, my position is just that you can't have a purely capitalist system without some regulation to keep monopolies from happening so globalization, in its current form is not as much capitalism run far, than good old fashioned monopolies.

Hey we could call it cross-border fascism maybe? BTW, I am a firm internationalist, so pro-globalization arguments I agree with in general, let's just discuss how to improve the outcome for more people, instead of simple pro/con arguments. End rant.


Frode Hegland
ceo
The Hyperwords Company
www.hyperwords.net

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/




-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
  • more on OECD on employment protective laws David Farber (Apr 17)
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]
AlienVault