| Friday, May 06, 2005 - 08:27 pm |
1. Its not profiting from the selling of a meal that's the problem, its the selling of a meal when it wasn't yours in the first place that is the issue. Its the robbing of people and expecting them to thank you for a few crumbs flung their way that's the problem.
Getting cheap goods from overseas dumped in your country increases your standard of living. Such dumping may increase local unemployment and increase the trade defecit, a lowering of GDP does not equal a lowering of consumption.
Yes, the US is no longer a source of cheap raw material for other markets (if you ignore agriculture). This is because the US has made the transition from being an oppressed country (by the British), to being an oppressor itself. This oppression is predominantly being done using coporations, they are the colonies of today, extracting wealth from foreign shores and shipping it back home.
2. Most societies now know that their actions have an impact on the environment, but I fail to accept that we are addressing it properly. For example, we know that habitat destruction causes species to become extinct but we continue to clear or degrade land globally.
Mankind does not yet possess the ability to move beyond the confines of our planet. Until such a capability exists, and is found to be feasible, it seems prudent to treat this planet as the only one we've got!
Fossil fuels are the main conventional "resource" that we are going to run out of, but there are other "resources" where we are running low on the "free/easy varieties" of them. For example several countries are running low on "clean water", and there are cities where "clean air" is a problem too. By the application of desalination, waste water recycling, moisture farming, etc much more water can be created/recylced for a country, but doing this is significantly more expensive/energy intensive than rain water which you get for free. There is nigh on an unlimited supply of minerals, we merely need to mine our waste to reuse the minerals over and over. For that matter fossil fuels can be synthesised, but the process requires significantly more energy than that released in their burning, its the "free/easy" resources that we are using up.
3. This is freedom.
4. I never said "all", I'm too pragmatic to use absolutes unless I'm very sure of my ground. The english speaking world buys your cultural exports like television primarily because it is "dumped" on foreign markets at prices that local producers can't compete with. Its a combination of the US's large population base combined with affluence combined with lots of marketing, and a xenophobic reluctance on the US's part to reciprocate on cultural exchange.
What I particularly find offensive on tv is commericals by multinationals that just use the same commercial from the US, or europe, or wherever the home of the multinational is. Its basically saying "we don't give a shit about your country or your economy, we are just here to extract as much wealth from you as we can and we're not going to the expense of creating a local advertisment".
El Guapo: Fairwell. May your medical paper make some pharmaceutical company a shit load of money.
Yankee: I realise the ships could be put to better use, but it was the irony of a company advertising its green credentials in moving cars that was the point I was making.